That's not really fair to say. He/she may honestly not know and it's not fair for you to judge them. At one point I wasn't so savvy on this stuff and was making mistakes myself. It wasn't until I got a hold of better copies of recording that I owned that I figured out I was loosing quality with the lossy files.
Then they shouldn't be recommending things. What this person suggested would take a lot of time and result in a giant mess for any poor individual that actually did it. Don't underestimate how quickly bad advice can travel.
I've got about 4500 songs in my iTunes library, about 67 gigs, consisting of aac, wav, mpeg, alac, and aiff files from 256k to 24/96. It's all good. The file types represent what quality was possible or considered appropriate at the time the selection was placed in the library.
I see what you're saying. Agree with the logic but I'm more liberal with what I keep. I'm sitting at about 28,000 songs now but I've deleted several thousand. No sense in having music I don't even like, just to have it. There's got to be at least a fighting chance that I'll want to hear it again someday.
It's still around 60gb though, since its predominantly lossless (unfortunately a lot is alac since itunes is just...easier. I tried foobar, I tried winamp, but I just can't get over how user friendly the tile-view on the computer infecting software hogging un-hi-fi apple software is). Then again, I'm 19 and in college, so I can't afford a whole lot of music. My music collection literally doubled this semester though, since dj's at the campus radio are allowed to rip anything in the studio archive to their personal pc.
Luckily its yard sale season yet again, so my music collection should get a much enjoyed boost
Wait are you saying you are upconverting your already lossy formats? You know if you are doing that you aren't getting better quality, if anything you are getting worse quality and wasting space. In order to get good quality you have to begin with a quality recording (Lossless source). From there you can convert down to lossy or convert to other lossless formats, not the other way around.
So whats the difference when you rip a cd to flac format? i have alot of original 320 kbps rip but just a small amount of 128 kbps ,i usually look for it in the highest format but some cant be found in good format.
So whats the difference when you rip a cd to flac format? i have alot of original 320 kbps rip but just a small amount of 128 kbps ,i usually look for it in the highest format but some cant be found in good format.
FLAC is lossless so it sounds (and is) identical to the original. MP3 throws away data (and thus quality) to make the file smaller.
Converting from 128 to 320 just makes the file larger, you can't get back what has already been lost and as pointed out before, because you're reencoding it with a lossy CODEC again, you further lose quality (probably not much if you're moving up to 320, but still. You should never transcode from one lossy format to another for this reason).
Essentially what you're saying is the equivilent of saying: If I photocopy a painting to black and white, and then photocopy it again as colour, I'll get the colour back. You can't, as it simply doesn't exist anymore and photocopying it again will just further degrade the quality.
FLAC is lossless so it sounds (and is) identical to the original. MP3 throws away data (and thus quality) to make the file smaller.
Converting from 128 to 320 just makes the file larger, you can't get back what has already been lost and as pointed out before, because you're reencoding it with a lossy CODEC again, you further lose quality (probably not much if you're moving up to 320, but still. You should never transcode from one lossy format to another for this reason).
Essentially what you're saying is the equivilent of saying: If I photocopy a painting to black and white, and then photocopy it again as colour, I'll get the colour back. You can't, as it simply doesn't exist anymore and photocopying it again will just further degrade the quality.
I understand what you saying , i just see people here saying they rip cd to flac or 320 kbps format so i thought they were doing the same thing. i have original 320 kbps rips and they sound just like flac( very clear details , drums etc) ,the 128 kbps file i had i converted to 320 kbps before i knew much about these stuff . yes i know bad in bad out i learnt that when i used a program to convert my videos to 1080p and realise that it quality wasnt improving (lol was trying to upload the video in 1080p for youtube). you learn by mistake . to sum it up, the conversion stuff is like a chemical change , you can have all the ingredients for a cake but once you bake the cake you cant get the ingredients back.
Total Tracks: 109,388 Total Albums: 8,818 Total Artists: 2,142 Total Genres: 76 Total Playing Time: 7495:29:23 All flac, on a 4tb drive enclosure, ripped via dbpoweramp.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
thats why i collect music at 320 kbps . probably should have tried another flac song
