Anyone here download a flac before?

Anyone here download a flac before?

Was it worth it?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/44.1_kHz
twitter.com/AnonBabble

it's like having the cd
it's nice if you need to encode to different formats, since you won't be doing lossy to lossy

but there's really no point otherwise, you won't hear any difference, there's no magic involved

* you won't hear a difference unless you're getting like 128kbps mp3 or some youtube to mp3 shit

>>Sup Forums

Yes
No, even if you have top end audiophileshit and very good hearing. I only download flac because what.cd made me an autist about it.

literally no difference between 160 kbps mp3 and a lossless
flac.

Hearing the difference now isn’t the reason to encode to FLAC. FLAC uses lossless compression, while MP3 is ‘lossy’. What this means is that for each year the MP3 sits on your hard drive, it will lose roughly 12kbps, assuming you have SATA – it’s about 15kbps on IDE, but only 7kbps on SCSI, due to rotational velocidensity. You don’t want to know how much worse it is on CD-ROM or other optical media.

I started collecting MP3s in about 2001, and if I try to play any of the tracks I downloaded back then, even the stuff I grabbed at 320kbps, they just sound like crap. The bass is terrible, the midrange…well don’t get me started. Some of those albums have degraded down to 32 or even 16kbps. FLAC rips from the same period still sound great, even if they weren’t stored correctly, in a cool, dry place. Seriously, stick to FLAC, you may not be able to hear the difference now, but in a year or two, you’ll be glad you did.

ayyyy

anyway it's literally playing an mp3 in a rar file

If you encapsulate the lossy mp3s in aa lossless compresison like rar does it prevent the bit rot?

Only if you run Linux

Hearing the difference now isn't the reason to encode to FLAC. FLAC uses lossless compression, while MP3 is 'lossy'. What this means is that for each year the MP3 sits on your hard drive, it will lose roughly 12kbps, assuming you have SATA - it's about 15kbps on IDE, but only 7kbps on SCSI, due to rotational velocidensity. You don't want to know how much worse it is on CD-ROM or other optical media.
I started collecting MP3s in about 2001, and if I try to play any of the tracks I downloaded back then, even the stuff I grabbed at 320kbps, they just sound like crap. The bass is terrible, the midrange…well don’t get me started. Some of those albums have degraded down to 32 or even 16kbps. FLAC rips from the same period still sound great, even if they weren’t stored correctly, in a cool, dry place. Seriously, stick to FLAC, you may not be able to hear the difference now, but in a year or two, you’ll be glad you did.

I like you

As someone stated OP it is better to record in flac because your music don't degrade over time. I can confirm all my music from 2001 sounds like crap.

Can't believe I'm only hearing about this now

What about on an SSD since this wouldnt have the rotational and fragmentation problems of a spinnign grive.

>due to rotational velocidensity.

Haven't seen this sweet meme since like 2010.

What? How is it possible for data to degrade or even change if it's not being directly edited? You're pulling a meme on us, aren't you?

with SSDs the bitrate is lost twice as much because of sector wear and write limits

WTF does sector wear and write limits have to do with it?

For each time a bit is read on an SSD, a lossy file loses around 0.1kbit.

Is pulling shit out of his ass.

please respond

nice u really confused me

>all these fucking newcunts

All of you, leave.

>newcunts
I've been here for a week now

>I'm not new because I've been here for 1 week

Is this a joke? I've been here for over 8 years. That FLAC copypasta is like 6 years old. There is no such thing as rotational velocidensity or any other audiophile meme shit.

definitely, sounds great.
I had to convert it in itunes to get it to work on my iphone but it was really easy :^)

:^)

all of us were newfags one day, just because he doesnt recognize this copypasta doesnt mean he wont be a quality user one day you cunt

I'm just glad that Firefox got support for it.

Whether you hear it or not is a debate for professional musifags and pettyminded enthusiasts.

From a Sup Forums standpoint, you shitted your data if you didnt do flac.
You had a set of data, then you have an inferior set of data.

The audiofags should be defending lossy not Sup Forums.

Only poors find lossy codecs justifiable.
1TB HDD's are only 50$ nowadays, Holy Mary.

It depends entirely on the quality of the music source. Unless your file was created from a source better than music-CD, it doesn't matter. All regular music CD's are recorded at a sampling frequency of 44.1 kHz. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/44.1_kHz

I've created music files of the most common types from my music CD's using Audacity: WAV, FLAC, 320bit MP3, 192-320var bit MP3, 128bit MP3. The FLAC files I've created are 924kbps, WAV are 1440kbps.

I've listened to my files using good enough headphones, Sennheiser HD595's and Beyerdynamic DT990 Pro 250Ohm through a tube-based class A amplifier.

I cannot tell the difference between a WAV, FLAC, 320kbps MP3 or a 128kbps MP3.

Apparently you also have to have "golden ears".

Before you drop any money on equipment, you need to first determine if you CAN hear a difference between different quality recordings.

are you tellng me that I wasted all my money on FLAC equipment when I could've just gotten 128kbps mp3 that sounds the same

Burn your shitty lossy files to a music cd and play them on a good stereo system. There's your audible difference between lossy and lossless right fucking there. Any fucking asshole can hear it plain as day. Go suck a bag of dicks you fucking retards.

Daily reminder that mp3 is over 2 decades old

these bits fly off the platter at incredible speeds ( v = r × ω). worse, they carry the sum of each electromagnetic charge accumulated when the heads changed their state. (Have you seen how powerful an HDD magnet is?)

using e=mc^2, the derivative c^2=e/m, and I = 1/d^2,, we can estimate that the energy of a collision between the bit and the brain of a hypothetical music lover sat 1.5 metres from the offending HDD. In real world terms, this equates to the energies required to propel a boiled egg through a barn door (two, if the first one is open).

>avatarfagging

FLAC is the patrician's audio format. MP3 is for dirty normalfag scum

I hear tell of such a thing but I've never seen it before.

The idiots who download lossless digital audio

Are the same idiots who will tell you that the difference is not only audible, but *earth shattering*

Regardless of whether they can hear a fucking thing.

I wasn't able to hear any difference because my gear is shit and I'm not autistic