[LingLing1337]

Sound quality is exactly the same. FLAC has the edge because it supports metadata and album art is can be compressed to a smaller size.

 

[fordgtlover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by myhandtel /img/forum/go_quote.gif many people can abx wav and lossless but i can't, so i just stick to lossless

Quote:

Originally Posted by fordgtlover /img/forum/go_quote.gif Low bitrate yes - high bitrate, not conclusively.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaZa /img/forum/go_quote.gif Bitrate on FLACs doesnt stand for soundquality, only how small the compressor has managed to compress it. AFAIK you cant even adjust it yourself much, much like you cant really adjust how small ZIP/RAR can compress your file, (only how strong algorithm is used can be changed) end result is what it is.

Sorry for the confusion. I read the post to say 'abx wav and lossy' (rather than lossless) and my response was in that context. I wasn't attempting to assert that bitrate decreased the quality. As you say, it goes to the amount of processing required to compress FLAC files - as you said, like ZIP.

 

[anetode]

Come now, the University of Manchester has to offer at least one maths course

 

[dazzer1975]

lol I'm sure it does, but i'm an arts student who pays no attention to spelling or grammatical errors on teh interwebs.

 

[Real Man of Genius]

You posers obviously don't have good enough ears or expensive enough systems/cables to hear the difference between FLAC and WAV.
Don't you trust his ears?

 

[QuadwinG]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real Man of Genius /img/forum/go_quote.gif You posers obviously don't have good enough ears or expensive enough systems/cables to hear the difference between FLAC and WAV. Don't you trust his ears?

X1

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real Man of Genius /img/forum/go_quote.gif You posers obviously don't have good enough ears or expensive enough systems/cables to hear the difference between FLAC and WAV. Don't you trust his ears?

He he
Perhaps he secretly put MP3 encoded audio data in the WAV container, or transcoded MP3 to FLAC...

 

[deaconblues]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acix /img/forum/go_quote.gif Wow, so much excitement here!! Does FLAC decompress in real time when you push play like a streaming process or faster, or is the decompression done just once at the beginning of the process (when you open the file)? I'm trying to see how I can benefit from FLAC by using it with Nuendo or WaveLab. Or is FLAC mainly just for portable players and as a playback? And yes, sometimes the sonic signature is different between the players and has nothing to do with the file format.

When simply playing a flac file, it is decompressed on the fly. This makes no difference in audio quality, since the DAC sees the same bitstream from a wav and a flac that's being decompressed.

In an audio editing program, a compressed file is typically decompressed and temporarily stored as an uncompressed file. In the case of flac, the audio data in this temporary file would be exactly identical to that of a wav file. I'm not sure if flac really offers any advantage for recordings that you are actively working on, but it's definitely a superior format for storing the finished product. It takes up less space while allowing 100% recovery of the original audio data, and its support for metatags allows for easier file organization.

 

[nirvanaxp]

I couldn't imagine having wav files for all my music. Besides fitting much less on my already full player, managing the files by name would be a nightmare. Flac is more or less the 'standard' for lossless music.