[chgolatin2]

Excuse the silly question but I dont consider myself an "expert audiophile" on all topics, however, I do have an Ipod with over  20gigs of music on it.  From time to time, I take some of my favorite cd recordings and I copy them directly with Itunes.  I was thinking that I was having the same quality recordings as the cd but the only factor was that is was being compressed or digitized into MP3 format  now I hear about this FLAC stuff and how great it is for recordings, especially for cd playback    So with that said I ask the question, I know some of the basics of FLAC, lostless music I think but what exactly is a lostless music?  Does it have more definition, does  the music sound more involving compared to MP3 and digital downloads?

How can I re-record in FLAC what exactly do I need to do and finally is it hard to do 

Thanks to all in advance!  Robert

[lcrim]

Flac is a lossless format, all the bits are there just compressed and it also permits metadata tagging which is another advantage, in addition to the lossless content.  MP3's are not only compressed but bits are missing.  There is no way to restore the missing bits, they are gone forever.
 You can rerip, for instance I use EAC and use flac as my compression program instead of lame.  To me the tagging is as important as the compression.

[gooberdude]

hey Robert,

as far as i know, no music file is going sound better than a full-size WAV file...which is what all your CD's are.     Apple came up with Apple Lossless, which is a way to shrink music but not reduce the sound quality...to my ears, they kinda failed.   I'd rather listen to 320mps aac or aiff...the bass seems better.

In terms of sound quality alone, nothing can touch a WAV file.  In terms of amount of data in a file, that 'mps' is a measure of this.  In comparison, a CD's WAV file will be something like 1400 mps, whereas the smaller, compressed file types are 320 mps or much lower.   Your Itunes software has the ability to change the mps size & the file type, just play around.

FLAC is just another lossless file type, but seems to sound REAL good.  hard to tell a FLAC file from a normal WAV file, even though the file size is much smaller with FLAC.

Check out www.dbpoweramp.com  and download the program...i'm just starting with this, but its a great tool for managing computer audio files and has loads of plug-in.

One that i'm trying out now is FLAC 1.1.3    this will help you convert WAV to FLAC, and also the other way around.

Probably the most important thing re: FLAC files is that NO cd player will play them & you're Ipod will not play them unless you use the Rockbox software.    FLAC is the bomb for anyone who has used Bit Torrent, or any other file sharing software (to legally download music from the 'net).   BUT, you either have to convert it to another file type to listen to it, or find software that can read those files.

[Jon L]

as far as i know, no music file is going sound better than a full-size WAV file...

I've come to the conclusion that the only way one can prove to himself or herself that wav sounds better/same/worse compared to lossless (apple lossless, Flac, WMA) is to do some real blind testing of the same song in all the formats.

I've even done this "long term," doing the same comparison of same files over different times of the day, month.  You know what?  When I'm not blinding myself, I can convince myself wav sounds better, but when I don't know which files are playing, my "preferences" tend to run all over the place, and this can change dependong on what time of day and my mood. 

My suspicion is that the Flac (or WMA) decoder itself possibly does "something" (using more processor power?  emitting more EMI/RFI?) that maybe changes the sound but at different amounts depending on the state of your computer/system, but my feeling is this is extremely subtle and variable, definitely NOT worth losing your ID3 tags with wav and the hard drive space. 

All the files are definitely exactly the same once I decompress everything to wav and bit-compare all of them, so losing bits during compression/decompression is not an issue. 

[chgolatin2]

Hey Matt, were you able to tell the difference in sound which your modified Ipod?  If so, what?

[gooberdude]

So far i've only listened to 320mps AAC files on it, and they have surprised the heck out of me.

All of my impressions/opinions of filetypes and their sound quality come from a standard Ipod on my system.  At one point i even copied the same track to my computer 10 different ways (through Itunes) & tested these against one another for a few weeks...really nerdy but i was interested.

Once my Imod is fully burned in, its only 1/2 way done now, i may try this again...but i think i have my favorites.

The kicker for me is the work & time required to copy an entire collection...you want to be real certain that the filetype you choose will be good a few years from now.  by good, i mean will it sound good or will it be necessary to re-do all the effort.  because of this, i stick to WAV files.   Right now you can get a good Lacie external HD w/200gb for less than $200.  Once a gb costs 50 cents or less, i'll be copying my entire collection in WAV format.

Since you are just starting out, do a test.   pick 1 track from a cd & copy it with difft filetypes & with difft mps ratings within each filetype.   then load them to Ipod and listen.   be sure to make an indicator as to what is what when you fill in the track info.  Since you are using the same song, just label the track as the filetype and the artist as the mps...or something similar.

If you are listening via ear bud earphones, i doubt you'll experience much change.  On your big rig though, changes should be audible.

matt


Want an eye opener?   Pit a 120 mps MP3 file against a 320mps AAC or AIFF file.....

I'll try and get some interesting tracks on the Imod before i bring it over Saturday.    the Ronins should be really cool!!!!

[lcrim]

Let me say it again-flac you can tag, wav - no tagging.  Very important point. 
Flac won't play on Ipod, dDpoweramp allows you to convert from lossless format to lossless format so you can convert your tagged flacs to AAC files that will play in iTunes.
When a flac is expanded to a wav file to be played, it is bit identical to the original.   It is identical, the same.  There is no debate on this point.

[gooberdude]

hey larry,

When i open up the Flac 1.1.3, should i convert all the Flac files to wav prior to loading into Itunes??

or, does dbpoweramp have a way to copy these to the HD?

i've only spent about 30 minutes going over the interface, haven't tried anything with it yet.


And i'm not familiar with the tags, but think that not having them has hampered Foobar from ID'ing tracks properly....does this make sense??

[Jon L]

I do have an Ipod with over  20gigs of music on it.  From time to time, I take some of my favorite cd recordings and I copy them directly with Itunes.  Does it have more definition, does  the music sound more involving compared to MP3 and digital downloads?

How can I re-record in FLAC what exactly do I need to do and finally is it hard to do 

I should qualify my previous post.  Everything I said pertains to my main speaker rig and does not apply if you are talking about portable DAPs, including iPods.  I still use lossless (apple lossless) on my iPod, but it's not worth arguing over whether one hears differences between wav and apple lossless on iPods.  Heck, Flac can't even be played on iPods unless you Rockbox it. 

My main reference for my post regarding lossless involves:
Silent audio PC Foobar/ASIO->Lynx 2B modified spdif output->Oritek modded Zhaolu AD1852->Almarro A205a mkII, Marsh A200s actively biamped->custom speakers.

P.S.  I hate how iTunes sounds on a PC (don't know about Mac's), and even if you don't want to spend the time to get to know Foobar/ASIO, at least go with Winamp/ASIO.

[JimJ]

FLAC kicks ass 

The newest versions of Winamp have native FLAC support, and will automatically convert to a writeable format before burning...

[lcrim]

flac is a compression format.  There are some players that are capable of expanding the file and playing it all in one process.  There was debate with Slimserver and a Squeezebox if there was any advantage to uncompressing the file at the music server before sending it to the Squeezebox.  In other words, should you send flacs or wavs to the Squeezebox.  I don't believe there was ever a definitive answer.
dBpoweramp will need the executable present but it can convert flacs to AAC's if you have both the flac.exe and iTunes installed.   I don't have the correct version installed but dBpoweramp is supposed to be a pretty good ripper as well.  What you can't do is create bits.  If you have the music as an mp3 you can't create the bits that were thrown away in ripping.  But you can go from AAC to WMA to flac and other lossless formats with dBpoweramp.

gooberdude:the tags are a wonderful way of cross referencing music.  you can play all the files from a particular artist or a year or a style depending on how they were tagged during the rip process.  There is also a program to rewrite your tags that I've never used so I don't remember its name but IIRC there is the word monkey in the title.  My point at any event is that wavs can't be tagged and for that reason alone they are a PITA

[gooberdude]

Thanks Larry,

i totally know what you mean.   I put about 30 cd's into foobar (wav format) & then realized i had no way of sorting them...i was used to Itunes where at least the interface was easy.   foobar is a pain when you don't know what's there!

i do see/hear an advantage to Foobar though, but the ASIO4ALL didn't work for the longest time with my M-Audio 2496 card.

So get this, Flac.exe never works in my pc...and i have a real fast, modern, custom built pc.  Each time i go to convert a Flac file it tells me the directory (directory.exe maybe?  its been a while) is missing.  So, after downloading & removing & downloading the needed file again & again & again I just gave up.

I was REALLY hoping the Flac 1.1.3 in dbpoweramp would let me do this without flac.exe...oh brother.

I have SO many good shows in Flac that i can't access...  i'll probably just stick them on a portable HD and take 'em to a friends house for the conversion.

is there a newer version of flac.exe, or any other flac converter you know of??

And what the hell happened to SHN?   those were the bomb back a few years ago.  Of the thousand or so live shows i downloaded (legally) at least 90% used to be .shn      it was a surprise to me when i took a year off, then found out flac was the winner.

Also, there is software to make MP3's into WAV files...i downloaded it, no clue what its called.  I had a few hundred comedy tracks in MP3.  the conversion software does bring the file up to WAV file size, but there's no way it restores the full sound quality.    probably worthless!!

matt

[Watson]

So get this, Flac.exe never works in my pc...and i have a real fast, modern, custom built pc.  Each time i go to convert a Flac file it tells me the directory (directory.exe maybe?  its been a while) is missing.  So, after downloading & removing & downloading the needed file again & again & again I just gave up.

I was REALLY hoping the Flac 1.1.3 in dbpoweramp would let me do this without flac.exe...oh brother.
...
is there a newer version of flac.exe, or any other flac converter you know of??

Give Flac 1.1.4 a try.  It's been out for a while, perhaps it fixes your problem.

[1000a]

where do I find the flac.exe

file

i can not find a file by such name in the downloaded flac stuff any where
in the folders -  :scratch:does it have a different name?


thanks to anyone who can help

[1000a]

found it

[nickspicks]

I like the FLAC frontend.
drag and drop.  very simple.

www.mikewren.com/flac

[1000a]

Help!  Before I go too much further ripping in FLAC is this correct?

SB3 screen says:
Bite Rate: (anywhere from apprx.) 632 to 930 kbps CBR
while being played back, is VBR something that does not apply here?

I hope this is OK in this circle posting, it seems Sqeeze Box stuff is scattered everywhere, maybe there could just be a streaming music circle that included everything concerning it in one place (sans RWA and Bolder).

Thanks a million

[acd483]

I think I should add a little clarity on the subject at hand.

First off, CDs are encoded in Red Book, not WAV.

WAV = Microsoft & IBM
AIFF = Apple

Both are extremely similar and are built off the same RIFF platform.
Both can be played on either platform. Both sound equally good on their
respective platforms, however from what I understand, if you
own an Intel Mac, you might want to use WAV instead.

FLAC is a "lossless codec" which reduces the size of a WAV file by
roughly half, however there is a caveat. The compression doesn't strip data
like mp3 and aac, however a FLAC file won't by any means sound
as good as a WAV. It can, however, be decompressed back to a WAV without
loss of quality. So if you are an audiophile with plenty of hard drive
space, don't use FLAC! Use WAV.

Listen guys, anytime you shrink the size of a file, you lose quality. In this
case, FLAC lets you backtrack to WAV without penalty. So what I say! Go buy
a hard drive for a few bucks and enjoy WAV. It rips quicker anyways!

[acd483]

BTW,

I have done a head to head on formats. It is very easy to tell the difference between uncompressed and compressed, regardless of bit rate.

If you're spending money on any aspect of your system, for God's sake, spend a couple hundred bucks on a big, external hard drive!

[IronLion]

acd483, what differences have you noted when comparing FLAC to WAV head to head?  And what system were you using to run these tests; I am interested especially in the D/A conversion step. 

Also, can anybody else concur with acd483's opinion on WAV being superior sounding to FLAC?  There seems to be many people out there who believe that WAVs are just a waste of space and add the un-tagable factor to your music library, but I'm interested to hear what people have to say about this, as I currently have a smallish FLAC library that is steadily growing.