What's better than FLAC?
September 29, 2012 at 9:36 pm #10787JDParticipant@jdLevel 5
You know, what files lose less to none compression when compared to FLAC?
Actually, what files are 100% compression-free?November 17, 2012 at 4:22 am #11900JakeParticipant@skrillexunknownmasterLevel 4
If I do recall I would say that WAV files are good quality. But the truest quality of any sound bit rate is on CD’s yes the compact discs you don’t have players for anymore :P. Reason being is because CD’s were used to burn hard copy uncompressed audio onto back before the days of “quick and speedy” internet depriving you of your sound quality. Hope this helped!
~JakeNovember 17, 2012 at 11:54 pm #11927mojibKeymaster@mojibLevel S
To my knowledge FLAC doesn’t compress WAV/AIFF files.December 10, 2012 at 8:46 pm #13112BlueParticipant@blueLevel 4
I thought FLAC WAS the best there is. There may be a codec for when they are editing in the studio, but from what I’ve always known FLAC is the best you can get. Not sure why you’d look for better than FLAC, anything better quality wouldn’t make a difference to your ears, it’ll just take up more space on your computer.March 20, 2013 at 9:08 pm #17653JaiParticipant@the-bad-touchLevel 2
I’m pretty sure FLAC is the best, but other lossless formats include WavePack, Monkey Audio, Apple Lossless and ofcourse Wave (wave isn’t great because it’s taxing on space, it doesn’t compress). They should all produce the same sound when they’re played though because they’re all lossless formats.March 20, 2013 at 10:01 pm #17662mojibKeymaster@mojibLevel S
Even the 24bit Lossless vinyl rips audiophiles enjoy comes as FLAC.March 22, 2013 at 11:14 pm #17870Nik MattParticipant@politburoLevel 2
Audio files compressed with FLAC will decompress into an identical duplicate of the audio data that was originally compressed. If sound quality is the only concern, all lossless formats could be considered of equal utility. For example: An uncompressed PCM WAV file will sound exactly like a FLAC file made from the same source and, when decompressed before playback, the FLAC file will contain the same exact audio data as the source from which it was made. Since file size is also a concern, however, lossless codecs like FLAC are used to store lossless copies of audio with a smaller footprint than WAV or AIFF (or whatever “raw” format in question). FLAC files can also store information like track numbers, titles, artist names, album names, etc., whereas standard WAV files cannot. FLAC also supports .cue files that copy all of the other data from a CD to facilitate making exact copies from the FLAC/cue files combined.
In comparison to the other popular lossless codecs, the main benefit FLAC has over the others is wider support from hardware manufacturers and its decompression is very fast. I’ll usually convert FLAC files to Apple Lossless simply because I use iTunes to listen to/organize my music library.March 25, 2013 at 4:23 pm #18096AndrewParticipant@capoLevel 0
As far as I know FLAC is the best. Though vinyl rips might be better, not really sure.April 2, 2013 at 9:44 pm #18843Kai CParticipant@synthacon9Level 3
Flac is easily the best. It combines mp3’s awesome file sizes with wav’s lossless pwnage. It would be awesome to get the straight from the desk audio of some of my favourite albums but that would be near impossible. Remember the files on the CD are all ready compressed from the studio files. FLAC is supported by lots of different media players, more so than wav which makes it the more versatile file format.May 29, 2013 at 12:45 am #43683AidanParticipant@xvulnerableLevel 4
I think FLAC is, by far the best, though I’m sure you’ve already realised that from the comments above xD
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.