Not saving a few MB by ensuring your FLAC ripping quality is 8

>not saving a few MB by ensuring your FLAC ripping quality is 8

Other urls found in this thread:

aynote.wordpress.com/2017/02/25/flacの異なる実装（ソフトウェア）/#more-1113
twitter.com/AnonBabble

> saving few megabytes
have you ever done a comparison ? last time i tried the difference was literally kilobytes

i suspect who ever wrote that codec was trolling us autists who have to fiddle with every setting and turn it up to 11

also why we are at it why did apple go with alac instead of flac ? i heard it had to do with the tags and flac tags are shit.... ipods and iphones not doing native flac was a fucking tragedy IMHO

I saved around 2-5MB on some average length tracks. File with 0 (no compression) vs 8.

>not saving lots more by using lossy formats instead holding on to placebo better qiality

It probably had something to do with their plans to implement DRM.

>lossless flac
>quality variation

what

>intentionally crippling your data
enjoy your rotational velocidensity
storage is cheap anyways

>not saving even more bytes by using stuff like wavepack or ape

There's no difference in quality. It's just faster compression vs better compression. There is literally no reason to use faster compression.

Just use 320 kbps MP3, human eye can't see the difference

At least use Opus you scrub

That's quality you'll never get back if you rip lossy. At least rip all CD in FLAC first then convert to lossy later for portable devices. I'm keeping all my FLAC on my computer and backups.

Throwing away my ancient CDs after it's all done.

>not having a 1tb ssd specifically for music

>not having mirrored RAIDs for your data

>File with 0 (no compression)
>no compression
FLAC is always compressed, it's just a matter of how much.

>not listening to uncompressed lossless file

Shaking my head

>having data

>downloads 2 of the same albums
>1 in flac
>1 in mp3
>literally no difference whatsoever

Im using creative aurvana golds and I'm 18 along with not blasting my eardrums with rave music
Anything above mp3 is for children

storelets, when will they learn

This is how I rip my CDs

FLAC for storage on hard drives with backups
MP3s for my phone

Why not do this? Unless you rip literally everyday and the time difference between 5 and 8 is huge, you MIGHT AS WELL rip in 8 in the same way you MIGHT AS WELL rip/download FLACs because you have the storage-space, regardless of muh audible difference, rather than wasting time comparing, just rip/download the best.

i'm sorry can you repeat that in english?

>you might as well take up more space so you might as well take up slightly less space

>2017
>mp3

>cares about quality and uses FLAC
>wants to save on space
Whats the difference between 500 MB FLAC file and 498 MB FLAC file?

LOSS OF QUALITY. One's for audiophile and other's for space savers.

No, they're both shit. True audiophiles use wavs exclusively for pure uncompressed quality.

compression doesn't mean loss of quality

>fell for the digital meme
>not clinging to superior vinyl analog

>he 's willing to risk getting some bits altered if a electron hits the RAM while the files are getting decompressed

MP3? Not Opus?

>VBR

Wew lad

constant 320 sounds worse

Also, CUETools makes smaller flacs within subset than libflac.

aynote.wordpress.com/2017/02/25/flacの異なる実装（ソフトウェア）/#more-1113

a%h%okay%%%t%hanks%for%%the%ti%p an%%on!

Do you use ZFS or other filesystem that prevents bitrot? Do you use ECC memory?

come on user...

>Do you use ECC memory

Who doesn't?

>ZFS
I can't because I share my music with family and they all use windows. Same reason I won't use opus instead of mp3.

it means download flacs and rip in 8 and be done with it

>he talks to ''''''people''''' who doesn't live the audiophile life

I can't be bothered to do that mate, I'll just assume the ones that I download are compressed correctly based on the ratings it received. Obviously I compress as much as possible when I do it myself.

but you can listen opus fine on windows

Not the same user, but I've actually been thinking of using lossy every since I switched to btrfs. The only thing that made me collect flac was archival, but now that I do have a decent filesystem, I'm thinking about switching to lossy. Is there any reason not to do this?

what...?
how does using a different filesystem contribute in the slightest

>worrying about space
What fucking year is this? 2000?

My phone is constantly full, if I want to add music I have to delete stuff.

Every MB counts.

do you have removable storage on it?

nope, just 16GB internal space.

>not saving all the GBs by streaming all your music and videos

100% of my storage space is reserved for video games and other software.

>getting shitty quality streams and wasting bandwidth
>not having access to music when offline
pleb

The music I listen to can't be streamed.

Unless I setup my own streaming server.

>Having

checksumming

flac -t file.flac

Protip: use gpu-accelerated FlacCL. Better speed AND better compression at the same time.

Should I convert my FLAC's to Opus for my Rockboxed Clip Zip? I got 64 GB SD card and my music collection isn't that big but I worry about power consumption more than quality loss. This shit stresses me out.

Opus is a meme codec and should never be used.

Using vorbis or whatever else is hardware supported is probably a better idea. Just use 160kbps or more and you're golden.

>Throwing away the original source for copies
What?

>it's a m-meme
but it works.

>believing that digital a digital record of analog data can be lossless in the first place

scoffing at the new way

>he thinks level 8 is the highest one

Goddmanit, are you fucking retarded? I mean filesystem checksumming Get it? Btrfs? ZFS? Does any of that ring a bell? Did you even read the thread? We're talking about bitrot. Bitrot. Get it, now? Or are you just that daft?

yeah dude flac -t tests for inconsistencies due to data rot
did you even try to understand what i wrote?

>Not listening only to 100% digitally created music.