voltcontrol
Fizheuer Zieheuer
I couldn't notice any lag in Traktor (timecode or controller operated) with either during sets. The OS and device drivers tend to throw in more issues. //OT
MP3 to WAV conversion
- Thread starter sean5340
- Start date
I couldn't notice any lag in Traktor (timecode or controller operated) with either during sets. The OS and device drivers tend to throw in more issues. //OT
elnaldo
Lunatic Member
Just to add:
"FLAC stands for Free Lossless Audio Codec, an audio format similar to MP3, but lossless, meaning that audio is compressed in FLAC without any loss in quality." source: http://flac.sourceforge.net/
Free, it's a very important part of this format....
LOSSLESS means LOSSLESS... NO QUALITY LOSS. the sound is there BIT BY BIT, exactly the same as the original, just compressed to save space.
bhunter
The Spherical Cow
Oh yes, I remember having to rip some 1000 CDs back in 2004. I had previously ripped about 400 of them to mp3. I used Exact Audio Copy (EAC) to do them. EAC is a great program for ripping. Flac is your best choice for archiving your music collection. Flac can reproduce the original cd if needed and is a nice format to use. I much prefer it over wav, apple lossless, etc.
bhunter
The Spherical Cow
Today's computers can easily handle an audio stream decompression. What I get a kick out of is that only in the last few years have PCs and MACs caught up with what Silicon Graphics machines were doing a decade and a half ago. My recently departed SGI O2 and INDY machines still handled music well.
trhee
ㅇtㅈyㅅr
Nope. "Garbage in, garbage out" rule applies here as well.
Do yourself a favor and convert everything to WAV or AIFF from the original source. Hard drives are dirt cheap these days. About 10 years ago, I had everything in 192k and realized I wasn't happy. Re-converted everything. All my music is on a solely dedicated 4TB hard drive that's connected to my main computer (27" iMac Quad Core) in my bedroom with Focal speakers as my bedroom system. Then I use a Logitech Squeezebox with my main system. Couldn't be happier although I'm itching to splurge for a Logitech Squeezebox Touch as well as a new Mac Mini with HDMI to stream movies from my iMac but that's another story.
Do yourself a favor and convert everything to WAV or AIFF from the original source. Hard drives are dirt cheap these days. About 10 years ago, I had everything in 192k and realized I wasn't happy. Re-converted everything. All my music is on a solely dedicated 4TB hard drive that's connected to my main computer (27" iMac Quad Core) in my bedroom with Focal speakers as my bedroom system. Then I use a Logitech Squeezebox with my main system. Couldn't be happier although I'm itching to splurge for a Logitech Squeezebox Touch as well as a new Mac Mini with HDMI to stream movies from my iMac but that's another story.
Scuzzer
Fixed Bias
Although the space savings are nice (even though storage is cheap) I don't think I could go without the tagging capabilities of FLAC, especially when I convert some of them to mp3 for mobile use.
Wigwam Jones
Caesar non supra grammati
The problem is that people tend to assume that smaller files mean compression has happened, but not loss. This is not actually the case.
With a compressed data file, like a Windows 'ZIP' file format, the original data is all safe. Nothing is lost, it is just compressed using mathematical algorithms that allow some data to be stored as mathematical expressions instead of actual data. So when you 'unzip' the file, the original data is restored completely. It should be bit-for-bit identical to the original.
MP3 is not like ZIP. It is (as described by others above) as a 'lossy' format. It is designed to make audio files smaller in size like ZIP does, but it doesn't just compress the data; it also removes data based on an algorithm that was originally designed to not sacrifice 'too much' audible quality. It essentially 'throws away' information in order to save space. That information cannot be restored by any means once it is gone. An MP3 file is NOT identical to the original source, and it cannot be 'unzipped' or made back into a duplicate of the original file.
FLAC and WAV and other 'lossless' formats compress audio files without throwing away any data (if converting from digital to digital). Some quality may still be lost if the conversion is from an analog original source to digital storage, but this is a matter for a different discussion.
Therefore, whenever possible, save your music from CD in a lossless format. The resulting files will be larger than equivalent MP3 files, but they are functionally identical to the original (again, if the conversion was from digital to digital).
Once converted to a lossless format like FLAC or WAV, one can further convert files to MP3 as desired. The MP3 files can be useful for things like portable music devices. But don't discard your lossless files when you make MP3 files. The lossless formats will still be superior for any playback device that can properly handle them.
Hope this helps.
With a compressed data file, like a Windows 'ZIP' file format, the original data is all safe. Nothing is lost, it is just compressed using mathematical algorithms that allow some data to be stored as mathematical expressions instead of actual data. So when you 'unzip' the file, the original data is restored completely. It should be bit-for-bit identical to the original.
MP3 is not like ZIP. It is (as described by others above) as a 'lossy' format. It is designed to make audio files smaller in size like ZIP does, but it doesn't just compress the data; it also removes data based on an algorithm that was originally designed to not sacrifice 'too much' audible quality. It essentially 'throws away' information in order to save space. That information cannot be restored by any means once it is gone. An MP3 file is NOT identical to the original source, and it cannot be 'unzipped' or made back into a duplicate of the original file.
FLAC and WAV and other 'lossless' formats compress audio files without throwing away any data (if converting from digital to digital). Some quality may still be lost if the conversion is from an analog original source to digital storage, but this is a matter for a different discussion.
Therefore, whenever possible, save your music from CD in a lossless format. The resulting files will be larger than equivalent MP3 files, but they are functionally identical to the original (again, if the conversion was from digital to digital).
Once converted to a lossless format like FLAC or WAV, one can further convert files to MP3 as desired. The MP3 files can be useful for things like portable music devices. But don't discard your lossless files when you make MP3 files. The lossless formats will still be superior for any playback device that can properly handle them.
Hope this helps.
dspear99ca
Super Member
Personally I can't imagine why anyone would not use a lossless format other than plain inertia. I started out this post thinking that portability might be a factor as not that many portable players will play FLAC or Apple Lossless, but NO portable players play WAV. You're going to have to convert to play one way or another. If you're playing your digital files on a computer, you just a need a player that supports whatever format you've chosen to store in, pretty much all of which are free. Storing audio files on your hard drive in WAV format is like storing your tent assembled... it needlessly takes up space and provides no tangible benefits. I suppose if you've got the space that's fine, but most people don't and... why would you choose to be wasteful if there's no benefit to be had?
just my 2 cents.
TebbieBear
Active Member
iPods play WAV files.
sean5340
Active Member
Yes, but they fill up really fast. That's why I converted ALL of my files to MP3 in the first place.
The sound is OK for work and such but inadequate at home.
The re-ripping has begun.
I'm going with WAV. I can fit 5 more hard drives in my case.
PickyEars81
Super Member
Zing!
Wigwam Jones
Caesar non supra grammati
Yes, but do they play music?
dspear99ca
Super Member
I stand corrected.
My garage and basement can also fit quite a few set-up tents, but I don't choose to use the space that way...
:lmao:
Ain't it the truth -- I loved my old Indy; my old SPARC boxes were a million miles ahead too. Wish I still had a couple of them -- Solaris is a nice OS.
Last edited:
![JimJ[VT]](/forums/data/avatars/m/20/20031.jpg?1443894878){kind=avatar}
JimJ[VT]
Super Member
Sure.
TebbieBear
Active Member
Me either, Heck I only use my iPod to exercise and such and thusly use (gasp) AAC and MP3 files. I was simply pointing out that it was possible.
uxwbill
Lurking in the Shadows
Bah.
I can demonstrate not just once, but twice.
Admittedly, this isn't the iron that most people were playing with back in the day. The M-ACPA and Audiovation both have impressive capabilities and stunningly high audio quality. I knew of someone who stacked a bunch of PS/2s up on a hand truck, with multiple sound cards in each one. They used this "configuration" as a multi-track recorder. IBM's drivers had no problem keeping up with the audio data from multiple cards, in either input or output directions.
I also know of people who digitize their record albums on this equipment.
RadShak1251
Super Member
Lossy compression differences: I'm not an expert on lossy formats, but I've read many times where people that do know about such things say the choice of encoder is very important, since it is that piece of software that does all the "choosing" as far as what music info to keep & which to throw away. Lossy decoders on the other hand are all pretty much identical.
And as the file size gets smaller i.e. 320kbps --> 256k --> 128k --> etc....the better the encoder, the better those files will sound.
In my experience the LAME freeware encoder seems to get the highest number of positive reviews when encoders are tested. Many ripping programs use it, free and paid-for. The Fraunhofer Institute's encoder - they invented the MP3 format - is also very popular but it usually doesn't receive as high a testing score as the LAME encoder (I have yet to see a 100% positive answer to this, but supposedly iTunes and Windows Media Player use this).
And as the file size gets smaller i.e. 320kbps --> 256k --> 128k --> etc....the better the encoder, the better those files will sound.
In my experience the LAME freeware encoder seems to get the highest number of positive reviews when encoders are tested. Many ripping programs use it, free and paid-for. The Fraunhofer Institute's encoder - they invented the MP3 format - is also very popular but it usually doesn't receive as high a testing score as the LAME encoder (I have yet to see a 100% positive answer to this, but supposedly iTunes and Windows Media Player use this).