"Lossless" Audio Codecs & flac

[Randy Johnson-10]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Just signed up...

 

When it comes to ripping audio CD's from the standard "Redbook" CDA - 16 bit bytes @ 44.1 kHz format to a computer's drive, which of the (250+) codec's available provide the least amount of loss? I don't care about disc space, just the best possible reproduction of the sound from the original source.

 

I use flac frequently, but the "l" in flac is questionable. After all, how can you compress data to <60% without any loss at all?

 

Randy

_______________________________________________
Paranoia mailing list
Paranoia@...
http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/paranoia

[pcmcg]

On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Randy Johnson <illuminetics@...> wrote:

Just signed up...

 

When it comes to ripping audio CD's from the standard "Redbook" CDA - 16 bit bytes @ 44.1 kHz format to a computer's drive, which of the (250+) codec's available provide the least amount of loss? I don't care about disc space, just the best possible reproduction of the sound from the original source.

 

I use flac frequently, but the "l" in flac is questionable. After all, how can you compress data to <60% without any loss at all?

 

Randy

_______________________________________________
Paranoia mailing list
Paranoia@...
http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/paranoia

If you doubt the compression, you can always uncompress your FLAC files and compare the FLAC WAVs to the original WAV files from the CDs.

_______________________________________________
Paranoia mailing list
Paranoia@...
http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/paranoia

[Oddbjørn Kvalsund]

On Sat 12 Jul 15:23, Randy Johnson wrote:

> Just signed up...
>
> When it comes to ripping audio CD's from the standard "Redbook" CDA -
> 16 bit bytes @ 44.1 kHz format to a computer's drive, which of the
> (250+) codec's available provide the least amount of loss? I don't
> care about disc space, just the best possible reproduction of the
> sound from the original source.
>
> I use flac frequently, but the "l" in flac is questionable. After all,
> how can you compress data to <60% without any loss at all?

Please see http://flac.sourceforge.net/faq.html#general__lossless_trust.

--
Regards
Oddbjørn Kvalsund
_______________________________________________
Paranoia mailing list
Paranoia@...
http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/paranoia

[Eric Sandeen-3]

Randy Johnson wrote:

> Just signed up...
>  
> When it comes to ripping audio CD's from the standard "Redbook" CDA - 16
> bit bytes @ 44.1 kHz format to a computer's drive, which of the (250+)
> codec's available provide the least amount of loss? I don't care about
> disc space, just the best possible reproduction of the sound from the
> original source.
>  
> I use flac frequently, but the "l" in flac is questionable. After all,
> how can you compress data to <60% without any loss at all?

Magic as far as I know.  But it works.  :)

Try:

       -V, --verify
              Verify a correct encoding by decoding the  output  in
parallel
              and comparing to the original

or if you don't believe that then do as the other reply said, and take a
wav, flac it, de-flac it, and compare.

-Eric
_______________________________________________
Paranoia mailing list
Paranoia@...
http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/paranoia

[J.B. Nicholson-Owens]

Casey McGinty wrote:
> If you doubt the compression, you can always uncompress your FLAC files and
> compare the FLAC WAVs to the original WAV files from the CDs.

I compared by converting both to raw PCM (with sox) and compared those
instead because I wasn't particularly interested header info
preservation.  I only cared about the samples.  Turns out that the same
samples were in both, in the right order, and the number of the samples
were the same (in fact the raw PCM files were identical), so I concluded
that FLAC did right by me and now I use FLAC.
_______________________________________________
Paranoia mailing list
Paranoia@...
http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/paranoia