Bastille Dave Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 (edited) I just discovered how to convert FLAC files to MP3. I guess I dont quite understand how alot of this works, I just know the difference between good quality and great quality. Anyway my question is: Is FLAC (converted to MP3 files) still better than MP3 @ 320 kbps or do I lose quality when I convert FLAC to MP3? Is FLAC the best there is? maybe someone can explain this to me and maybe use these things to help explain: >>> store purchased cd>flac files>AAC>MP3@320> etc...... thanks Edited March 29, 2010 by Bastille Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesweetscience Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Flac is not compressed. Any mp3 is compressed. So even at 320Kbps Flac is better quality although most will tell you that you won't hear the difference between the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarkus406 Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 I think WAV is the best there is. FLAC is lossless as well (no loss of audio quality), but I think it is compressed to some extent (while retaining losslessness). Then again, I'm not sure. But mp3's are crap, no matter what. 320kbps will sound close to CD quality, but you're much better off with FLAC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony R Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 QUOTE (Tarkus407 @ Mar 29 2010, 03:42 PM) I think WAV is the best there is. FLAC is lossless as well (no loss of audio quality), but I think it is compressed to some extent (while retaining losslessness). Then again, I'm not sure. But mp3's are crap, no matter what. 320kbps will sound close to CD quality, but you're much better off with FLAC. FLAC stands for Free Lossless Audio Codec, an audio format similar to MP3, but lossless, meaning that audio is compressed in FLAC without any loss in quality. This is similar to how Zip works, except with FLAC you will get much better compression because it is designed specifically for audio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Owl Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Audio Quality is the main reason why I still buy CD's........ Sure I have an iPod with MP3s, but that's for the car, and general listening........ If I want to sit down and listen to a record... I have the CD right there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastille Dave Posted March 30, 2010 Author Share Posted March 30, 2010 ok, so if I download something at FLAC and then convert it to MP3, is it still better sound quality than if I downloaded it at 320 kbps, or is the FLAC now in essence at 320 kbps level, so to speak. In other words, am I wasting my time downloading FLAC and converting it to MP3 or should I just eliminate the middleman and download MP3's @ 320 kbps. If I convert FLAC to MP3, is it now equal to 320 or is it still slightly better? FLAC(converted to MP3)=MP3@320 or is FLAC(converted to MP3)>(still better than) MP3 @ 320 this is my question..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted April 8, 2010 Share Posted April 8, 2010 You've probably already found your answer, but maybe this will help... Lossy Format This means when you rip a CD, you lose audio data and quality. The most common lossy file is MP3. Common rip rates are 192, 256, and 320 kbps. Lossless Format This means when you rip a CD, it is an exact audio copy and you lose no quality. The most common type of lossless files are FLAC, WAV and WMA Lossless. A good comparison of lossless formats can be found here. Will you be able to hear a difference between lossy and lossless? Depending on what you use to play your music, what your speakers/headphones are, and how good your ears are, you may or may not notice a difference between them. Some people, however, cannot hear the difference between them even on the highest end of hardware. Personally, I cannot tell the difference between MP3@320 and WAV. Does my player support lossless? Some portable music players (iPods, Zunes, etc) will not play certain lossless formats. You should check to see if your player can handle it, and what lossless format your player likes best. Foobar and Winamp should be able to play all type of lossless formats, however WMP11 will only play WMA Lossless. Lossless is more future proof than Lossy The best thing about the lossless format is that you can convert FLAC to WMA Lossless and back to FLAC as many times as you want without losing any quality. The same goes for any lossless format. With lossy format (MP3) each time you convert you lose quality and cannot get it back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Show Don't Tell Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 QUOTE (Bastille Dave @ Mar 29 2010, 06:03 AM) Is FLAC better than MP3 @ 320 kbps? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pags Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Okay I'm going to jump into this discussion because I'm finally trying lossless formats on my Zune player. Zune software will rip in WMA Lossless format. Question 1: How does the filesize of WMA lossless compare to FLAC? Question 2 (if FLAC is smaller): What programs are out there that can; a) rip in FLAC format, and convert from FLAC to WMA lossless? Thanks! PS: Tom Sawyer @ MP3 320kbps = 10.9 MB Tom Sawyer @ WMA Lossless 953kbps = 30.2 MB I haven't played the two back to back yet - but here HAS to be a sound difference. I'd be amazed if there weren't. But I do wonder if it will be 'enough' of a sound improvement to justify file sizes 3X larger. We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Show Don't Tell Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 QUOTE (Pags @ Apr 9 2010, 05:25 PM)Question 1: How does the filesize of WMA lossless compare to FLAC? I did a test for you, using my Power Windows CD. FLAC files were encoded using level 8 (most/best compression). WMA files were encoded at the normal setting (the only setting available). FLACFILENAME LENGTH SIZE (MB) COMPRESSION RATIO 01 The Big Money.flac 5:37.02 36.7 0.6473 02 Grand Designs.flac 5:06.38 33.4 0.6490 03 Manhattan Project.flac 5:07.35 31.4 0.6086 04 Marathon.flac 6:09.52 38.3 0.6171 05 Territories.flac 6:20.35 37.6 0.5884 06 Middletown Dreams.flac 5:15.35 32.1 0.6066 07 Emotion Detector.flac 5:11.13 31.3 0.5989 08 Mystic Rhythms.flac 5:54.40 35.3 0.5928 TOTAL 44:42.25 276.6 0.6129 WMAFILENAME LENGTH SIZE (MB) COMPRESSION RATIO 01 The Big Money.wma 5:37.02 35.9 0.6347 02 Grand Designs.wma 5:06.38 32.8 0.6378 03 Manhattan Project.wma 5:07.35 31.0 0.5995 04 Marathon.wma 6:09.52 37.7 0.6069 05 Territories.wma 6:20.35 36.6 0.5722 06 Middletown Dreams.wma 5:15.35 31.5 0.5947 07 Emotion Detector.wma 5:11.13 30.9 0.5916 08 Mystic Rhythms.wma 5:54.40 34.9 0.5853 TOTAL 44:42.25 271.7 0.6021 So it looks like WMA lossless has better compression / smaller file sizes, but just by a hair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pags Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 QUOTE (Show Don't Tell @ Apr 9 2010, 08:15 PM) QUOTE (Pags @ Apr 9 2010, 05:25 PM)Question 1: How does the filesize of WMA lossless compare to FLAC? I did a test for you, using my Power Windows CD. FLAC files were encoded using level 8 (most/best compression). WMA files were encoded at the normal setting (the only setting available). FLACFILENAME LENGTH SIZE (MB) COMPRESSION RATIO 01 The Big Money.flac 5:37.02 36.7 0.6473 02 Grand Designs.flac 5:06.38 33.4 0.6490 03 Manhattan Project.flac 5:07.35 31.4 0.6086 04 Marathon.flac 6:09.52 38.3 0.6171 05 Territories.flac 6:20.35 37.6 0.5884 06 Middletown Dreams.flac 5:15.35 32.1 0.6066 07 Emotion Detector.flac 5:11.13 31.3 0.5989 08 Mystic Rhythms.flac 5:54.40 35.3 0.5928 TOTAL 44:42.25 276.6 0.6129 WMAFILENAME LENGTH SIZE (MB) COMPRESSION RATIO 01 The Big Money.wma 5:37.02 35.9 0.6347 02 Grand Designs.wma 5:06.38 32.8 0.6378 03 Manhattan Project.wma 5:07.35 31.0 0.5995 04 Marathon.wma 6:09.52 37.7 0.6069 05 Territories.wma 6:20.35 36.6 0.5722 06 Middletown Dreams.wma 5:15.35 31.5 0.5947 07 Emotion Detector.wma 5:11.13 30.9 0.5916 08 Mystic Rhythms.wma 5:54.40 34.9 0.5853 TOTAL 44:42.25 271.7 0.6021 So it looks like WMA lossless has better compression / smaller file sizes, but just by a hair. Very cool. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Show Don't Tell Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 Just for comparison purposes, here are three other popular lossless format encodings of the same Power Windows CD: Apple Lossless (ALAC)FILENAME LENGTH SIZE (MB) COMPRESSION RATIO 01 The Big Money.m4a 5:37.02 37.3 0.6592 02 Grand Designs.m4a 5:06.38 34.1 0.6627 03 Manhattan Project.m4a 5:07.35 32.2 0.6234 04 Marathon.m4a 6:09.52 39.2 0.6317 05 Territories.m4a 6:20.35 38.5 0.6024 06 Middletown Dreams.m4a 5:15.35 32.9 0.6212 07 Emotion Detector.m4a 5:11.13 32.2 0.6151 08 Mystic Rhythms.m4a 5:54.40 36.1 0.6068 TOTAL 44:42.25 283.0 0.6271 Shorten (SHN)FILENAME LENGTH SIZE (MB) COMPRESSION RATIO 01 The Big Money.shn 5:37.02 39.0 0.6882 02 Grand Designs.shn 5:06.38 35.9 0.6981 03 Manhattan Project.shn 5:07.35 34.0 0.6586 04 Marathon.shn 6:09.52 41.2 0.6631 05 Territories.shn 6:20.35 40.9 0.6391 06 Middletown Dreams.shn 5:15.35 34.6 0.6525 07 Emotion Detector.shn 5:11.13 34.3 0.6558 08 Mystic Rhythms.shn 5:54.40 38.2 0.6406 TOTAL 44:42.25 298.4 0.6613 Monkey's Audio (APE)FILENAME LENGTH SIZE (MB) COMPRESSION RATIO 01 The Big Money.ape 5:37.02 34.5 0.6094 02 Grand Designs.ape 5:06.38 31.4 0.6096 03 Manhattan Project.ape 5:07.35 29.7 0.5750 04 Marathon.ape 6:09.52 36.1 0.5815 05 Territories.ape 6:20.35 35.2 0.5502 06 Middletown Dreams.ape 5:15.35 30.2 0.5709 07 Emotion Detector.ape 5:11.13 29.6 0.5664 08 Mystic Rhythms.ape 5:54.40 33.4 0.5605 TOTAL 44:42.25 260.5 0.5773 *Note: Even though it is clear that APE can the best compression, decoding/processing time are longer and there is very limited software support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fledgehog Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Yes. FLAC is lossless, mp3 is lossy. Simple answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now