[steviebee]

Not sure this is the right forum (maybe DSC?) but here goes:
Because I have a brain the size of a fairly small housefly after a night on the sugar, I just cannot figure out the advantage of using Level 0 for encoding in FLAC rather than, say, Level 8....This arises from a discussion w/ a musician friend where he felt that there appeared to be an audible difference between 0 and other levels...irrespective of that, this led me onto thinking about why we rip in different levels anyway.

FLAC is lossless. Therefore, Level 0 & Level 1,2,3 etc should be of the same apparent quality, non? But, if a Level 0 rip sounds better, even slightly, then the other levels aint lossless? But if there's no quality bonuses, & the only point of ripping to 8 is to save a few MB of space, why ever rip to 0?

Call me a thickie by all means, but I just can't see it...what am I missing here?

 

[shigzeo]

there is a reason and here it comes...

 

[steviebee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by shigzeo /img/forum/go_quote.gif there is a reason and here it comes...

You make it sound like the Head Fi Death Star is about to materialise in my orbit & whup my sorry ass! LOL

Laser up!

 

[shigzeo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by steviebee /img/forum/go_quote.gif You make it sound like the Head Fi Death Star is about to materialise in my orbit & whup my sorry ass! LOL Laser up!

i was sort of hoping that the answer would be shot out just behind my spout. alas, we are still in the dark. personally i am not a flacer or alac or wavpack or wav or aiff or lossless in general guy except for back up so i am only a little interested in this.

 

[Oya?]

I assumed it had to do with decoding/encoding speed, as opposed to any audible differences?

 

[steviebee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oya? /img/forum/go_quote.gif I assumed it had to do with decoding/encoding speed, as opposed to any audible differences?

So why would anyone rip to 0?
To waste some time?

 

[Oya?]

Quote:

Originally Posted by steviebee /img/forum/go_quote.gif So why would anyone rip to 0? To waste some time?

0 is faster to encode to? So if you had to convert, say, 10000 songs, it might make a difference... I never thought to try and compare just how much faster it is, since I've never had any troubles with level 8.

EDIT: it might also be significant if you were using a player that converts on-the-fly while playing, this is all quite foreign to me.

EDIT2:
Quote:

Originally Posted by SysteX /img/forum/go_quote.gif It is also important to note that while the higher compression rate (8) takes more processor time to encode, there is no difference in the processor time it takes to decode FLAC files of different compression rates. The higher compression settings are a one-time expense for smaller file sizes.

So it's only to save time the first time you encode the files to FLAC. Something like FLAC 5 is apparently significantly faster than FLAC 8 to write. But reading speed for all levels is the same.

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f15/fl...estion-253135/

 

[steviebee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oya? /img/forum/go_quote.gif 0 is faster to encode to? So if you had to convert, say, 10000 songs, it might make a difference... I never thought to try and compare just how much faster it is, since I've never had any troubles with level 8. EDIT: it might also be significant if you were using a player that converts on-the-fly while playing, this is all quite foreign to me.

You're right of course. DOH! 0 is faster. Got confused. Well, I did say it was thickie time (sheepish)

 

[shigzeo]

i told you so...

 

[steviebee]

I stand abashed






& thanks Oya?

 

[krmathis]

Level 0, 5, 8, ... are identical when it comes to audio quality. Its lossless regardless which setting you use.
What varies are the compression rate (aka bitrate) and encoding time.
0 = faster encoding and larger files.
8 = slower encoding and smaller files.

Don't forget that FLAC was developed many years back, when encoding time was more of an issue than today. Today I see no reason to go below level 5.

 

[Culverin]

the only dif i can think of would be battery life on a portable player.
decoding from lvl 8 flacs would take more processing power, but i doubt there is any data on how much difference.

 

[Punnisher]

They all sound the same. As for uncompressing with portables, I have no idea.

 

[Warhawk]

I personally don't use flac, but from the last couple of posts, it looks like they all sound the same.

So if you wanted fast flac files and had say a 160 gig mp3 player, it would be best to use level 0?

But if you were tight on space and time wasn't an issue, then 8 would be best?

 

[steviebee]

^ Thanks for all the input guys

And yes, Warhawk, that looks to be about it.

(Your user name is nothing to do the early PSOne game is it? Just wondered!)