0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 8845 times.
What player are you using, and in what system, the main rig or a desktop/portable or secondary system? I would recommend keeping everything in FLAC for archiving/storage at least! Why? Smaller files and good tagging support. But...I personally hear sonic differences between FLAC and wav, and it pisses me off...cuz there are supposed to be none (topic of another thread), they are the same at the receiving end once FLAC is decoded. So, for me, the complete bs hassle of tagging in iTunes, etc for my main rig (I don't play in itunes, I just use it for library management, I play in Pure Music or Amarra, both of which use iTunes library) is somewhat worth it. But if you don't hear the differences (and there should be none, and most folks don't hear a diff) then convert to any other lossless format that your player is comfortable with. If the player is comfortable with FLAC, then keep it in FLAC.
Mike, No offense but that's not true, and not normal useage. Your use of the terms lossless and lossy are incorrect. Lossless does NOT mean master tape quality. It simply means those formats that do not lose resolution or musical information in their conversion. They include wav, aiff, FLAC, Apple Lossless, monkeys audio, ogg vorbis to name a few. They can be ANY sample rate, such as cd/redbook. Lossy means lost musical information or resolution and includes the family of Mp3, Dolby digital, DTS core and AAC.The issue with Rhino is NOT the term lossless, but the term hidef when all they are selling is lossless redbook. Hidef infers higher than redbook.
...I personally hear sonic differences between FLAC and wav, and it pisses me off...cuz there are supposed to be none
...I personally hear sonic differences between FLAC and wav, and it pisses me off...cuz there are supposed to be none (topic of another thread), they are the same at the receiving end once FLAC is decoded.
I have one experiments comparing Apple lossless to AIFF and AIFF sounds better (this was after having my 700+ CD library converted to lossless!). I think Soundkeeper Barry and his friends did some experiments and were consistently able to identify the lossless formats vs AIFF.Nomad, Ted is right on the lossless nomenclature.
report any download sites or sources that purport to have HiRez files but are actually just upconverted 16/44 (found out through sneaker net, web info, etc.).
I have a page on this...http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2013/07/list-suspected-44-or-48khz-pcm.htmlLots of faux SACDs out there folks.
The object of this thread was never to worry about something as low quality as lossy... the object of my thread is to report when standard lossless redbook is trying to be represented as 24 bit hirez. Just because you upconvert 16/44 music to 24/96 does not make it hirez. We call that "faux" hirez and are out to police the download sites to make sure the higher selling prices of hirez don't tempt companies to try and resell redbook (still lossless) as anything more than what it is, great stuff but not hirez. The Rhino fiasco is an anomaly...they aren't trying to upconvert redbook to 24 bit and sell it...they are calling redbook "hidef"!!! Confusing, introduces a new term that the download public thinks is "hirez", and..oh, wrong!Soo...let's please get back to the subject of reporting 24 bit files with 16 bit DNA. Thanks.
Page created in 0.17 seconds with 28 queries.