Regarding lossy, lossless, compressed, and uncompressed file formats

[Hyydrah]

I don't see why FLACs aren't feasible for the average person now, a FLAC song averages at about 40mb, meaning 5000 songs is only 195gb. That's over 400 albums (@ 12 songs/album), taking up only 20% of a 1tb drive, which these days costs under $100.

The problem is that most people don't seem to have desktops, and even if they do they usually aren't willing to upgrade them. Not to mention that mobile devices typically don't have these sort of storage capacities and it isn't feasible to download them form the cloud, yet

[Hyydrah]

The OP said they aren't.

@TheProfosist

 

I said "It is understandable that saving hundreds of songs as FLACs isn't feasible for the average person (at least for the time being)". I personally only listen to <50 songs, but it seems that most people would want to save many more than that

[Hyydrah]

I use ALAC at home and on my iPod Classic and refuse to put any music on my phone so i don't bother organising anything, just keep it all on the classic  :D. Then again i'm probably not the 'average' user. This is why i'm hoping CDs carry on for a good while longer because the original lossless version has to come from somewhere and i can't see the big music download sites starting to sell in lossless formats, it's a niche market at the moment.

Cool

[OddballMV]

Oh of course CDs aren't the future but at the moment if you want to listen to mainstream music they are pretty much the only way to get a decent quality file.

[Hyydrah]

Oh of course CDs aren't the future but at the moment if you want to listen to mainstream music they are pretty much the only way to get a decent quality file.

Maybe mainstream music, but most of what I listen to is available on vinyl (that doesn't necessarily mean that they're old by the way)

[ShearMe]

hurr durr AFLAC is better 

 

/troll

Edited July 6, 2013 by ShearMe

[TheProfosist]

practically, in terms of modern computing terms, the power required is negligible, and so is the extra storage space for lossless.

 

 

CDs are already very close to the ideal of audible transparency, but the way they are mastered is definitely holding us back.

 

 

 

all the music on my smartphone is in FLAC.  I just rotate it out when I'm done listening to it, just like I'd have to do with MP3s anyways since there's not enough space either way.

 

 

 

 

I'll see if I can make the difference a bit more clear in the FAQ.  Thanks for this.  You forgot h.264/h.265 as a compressed lossy video codec though ^_^

.

 

I wouldnt say processing between lossy and losless is negligible especially when you start dealing with multi channel audio or what if you decide to just convert your whole collection at once? I find that NeroAAC at VBR 0.5 is far quicker than FLAC at highest compression, this is even the case with standard music from CDs.

 

I would have to disagree about CDs being audibly transparent. As an example if that was the case they would record directly to it then. What do you mean by how stuff is mastered? like what its saved to? how its saved? what its done using? etc...

 

if you wouldnt have enough space even with MP3s what causes the need to have so much content on the go all the time? If yo ureally do need that much on your smartphone look at some of those portable drives that Linus always mentions.

 

and to the last bit huh? yes H.264 is a codec and MP4 is a container but what your point. Also H.265 is still only in its preliminary stages still.

 

 

 

The problem is that most people don't seem to have desktops, and even if they do they usually aren't willing to upgrade them. Not to mention that mobile devices typically don't have these sort of storage capacities and it isn't feasible to download them form the cloud, yet.

 

why does having a desktop matter? or upgrading them for that matter? Mobile devices have plenty storage in most cases though it really depends on how much music you need/want/intend to carry around. Do you mean stream from the cloud because downloading wouldnt be a problem at all. And in the case of streaming the streaming services wouldnt do it because it would be far more costly bandwidth wise on their part and they may need a faster infrastructure.

 

 

 

@TheProfosist

 

I said "It is understandable that saving hundreds of songs as FLACs isn't feasible for the average person (at least for the time being)". I personally only listen to <50 songs, but it seems that most people would want to save many more than that.

 

Looking at my FLAC collection I have track ranging from say 25mb to 50mb a song. At 50mb a song, which are longer songs, you could get around 160 song on 8gb of storage. All of the 50mb songs were at a minimum 6min+ so thats 16 hours of music minimum. Just so you know these numbers are VERY rough.

 

 

 

This might be bad news for you (and probably for all of us as well): legitimate CDs are usually not the best quality audio files you can get. When they are retrieved from vinyl (done properly), they will often sound better than CDs because for whatever reason, CDs are poorly mastered much of the time when compared to vinyl. Also take in to account the maximum capabilities of CDs, which creates a further bottleneck.

 

if you have good pristine vinyl and a high end table then yes they can sound better there is more range in vinyl which is analogue. Having such a setup isnt cheap and since we have started moving toward better digitally distributed audio will only become more niche. I wouldnt say CDs are poorly mastered but errors can happen thats why there are correction databases. The do have limitations and always have thats why there have been music DVDs, Blurays, and now just digitally distributed stuff.

[TheProfosist]

Oh of course CDs aren't the future but at the moment if you want to listen to mainstream music they are pretty much the only way to get a decent quality file.

 

your saying legally right?

 

 

 

Maybe mainstream music, but most of what I listen to is available on vinyl (that doesn't necessarily mean that they're old by the way).  :lol:

 

So you listen to niche music? You do realize that most times that vinyl was made from a digital recording right?

[Hyydrah]

why does having a desktop matter? or upgrading them for that matter? Mobile devices have plenty storage in most cases though it really depends on how much music you need/want/intend to carry around. Do you mean stream from the cloud because downloading wouldnt be a problem at all. And in the case of streaming the streaming services wouldnt do it because it would be far more costly bandwidth wise on their part and they may need a faster infrastructure.

I mentioned desktops because they're capable of higher capacity HDDs at cheaper prices, and are easier to upgrade versus, say, a laptop. I'm not saying that storage is a problem if you only have <100 FLAC files, but if you have more I can see it becoming an issue. Streaming music will be an issue because it takes time to download, and you also need access to the storage medium

 

 

Looking at my FLAC collection I have track ranging from say 25mb to 50mb a song. At 50mb a song, which are longer songs, you could get around 160 song on 8gb of storage. All of the 50mb songs were at a minimum 6min+ so thats 16 hours of music minimum. Just so you know these numbers are VERY rough.

Remember that the full 8GB of storage isn't designated exclusively for music files. Games, apps, etc. take up space as well. I don't think that most people would want to upload/download music constantly and would rather have all of their songs in a lossy format available without the hassle

if you have good pristine vinyl and a high end table then yes they can sound better there is more range in vinyl which is analogue. Having such a setup isnt cheap and since we have started moving toward better digitally distributed audio will only become more niche. I wouldnt say CDs are poorly mastered but errors can happen thats why there are correction databases. The do have limitations and always have thats why there have been music DVDs, Blurays, and now just digitally distributed stuff.

I'm not suggesting to rip vinyls on your own.  :lol: HDTracks, for instance, does a very nice job of it

[TheProfosist]

I just want to point out there is this magical this called external storage if you need a buttload of music and would also like to point out that the adverage person couldnt care less about the quality of music they listen to 99% of the time. That would be why the industry is where it is.

[h264]

I would have to disagree about CDs being audibly transparent. As an example if that was the case they would record directly to it then. What do you mean by how stuff is mastered? like what its saved to? how its saved? what its done using? etc...

 

Mastering is the process where a sound engineer takes a studio recording and edits the track to sound the way he likes it.  He can mess with the dither, add effects, and most recently up the main vocals and beats of the track as loud as it can go.  Cause the music industry has determined in their infinite wisdom instead of getting better equipment to customers they'll re-master the tracks for their iPod earbuds.  The result is bloated bass and less dynamic range on newer recordings.

 

 

if you wouldnt have enough space even with MP3s what causes the need to have so much content on the go all the time? If yo ureally do need that much on your smartphone look at some of those portable drives that Linus always mentions.

 

My point exactly.  Why do you need that many songs on your portable device? I'd rather have a few well encoded ones.  So I just use FLAC.

[ShearMe]

I have a 4GB Cowon filled with a mix of mp3s and FLACs - I've yet to burn through all songs in the course of a day, and I stack chairs for a living...

[TheProfosist]

Mastering is the process where a sound engineer takes a studio recording and edits the track to sound the way he likes it.  He can mess with the dither, add effects, and most recently up the main vocals and beats of the track as loud as it can go.  Cause the music industry has determined in their infinite wisdom instead of getting better equipment to customers they'll re-master the tracks for their iPod earbuds.  The result is bloated bass and less dynamic range on newer recordings.

 

 

 

My point exactly.  Why do you need that many songs on your portable device? I'd rather have a few well encoded ones.  So I just use FLAC.

 

O US pop music, im glad I never really like thee. Even what I did listen to US music is was never anything all that mainstream besides their hits if they had any. Not saying this doesnt happen else where but many other places do have much better respect for their music (at least in certain genres). Also isnt that why live recording are the way to go usually they go untouched in most cases. I <3 live!

[TheProfosist]

I have a 4GB Cowon filled with a mix of mp3s and FLACs - I've yet to burn through all songs in the course of a day, and I stack chairs for a living...

 

stack chairs? do you run a rather large competition of musical chairs on a daily basis? 

 

 

disclaimer: this is totally a joke, i just this you would have to stack lots of chairs if you did this.

[OddballMV]

your saying legally right?

 

Of course, can't be pirating everything now can we.

[Hyydrah]

I just want to point out there is this magical this called external storage if you need a buttload of music and would also like to point out that the adverage person couldnt care less about the quality of music they listen to 99% of the time. That would be why the industry is where it is.

And you need access to it in order to use it. If you're out and about, you can't play that music most of the time

[Hyydrah]

Why do you need that many songs on your portable device? I'd rather have a few well encoded ones.  So I just use FLAC.

I agree, but others don't seem to think that way

[ShearMe]

Of course, can't be pirating everything now can we.

 

Just half of everything.

[TheProfosist]

And you need access to it in order to use it. If you're out and about, you can't play that music most of the time.

 

still dont see what i need a couple hundred gigs of music when im out and about (in my case at least)

 

lol still this isnt what this thread is about and not why I started posting in this thread, though it is fun.

[ShearMe]

still dont see what i need a couple hundred gigs of music when im out and about (in my case at least)

 

lol still this isnt what this thread is about and not why I started posting in this thread, though it is fun.

 

You expect a thread to not derail? You know this is the internet right?

[Hyydrah]

still dont see what i need a couple hundred gigs of music when im out and about (in my case at least)

 

lol still this isnt what this thread is about and not why I started posting in this thread, though it is fun.

That's 29 FLAC files, about 2 hours of music. (one is an MP3 and the other is the Foobar2000 playlist)

[TheProfosist]

that file size it within what i was talking about earlier.

[Hyydrah]

that file size it within what i was talking about earlier.

1GB for 2 hours of music! Even if you had 3GB free, That's still only ~6 hours, which isn't enough for one day with me

By the way, that's also assuming that I don't skip any tracks, which I often do

[TheProfosist]

1GB for 2 hours of music! Even if you had 3GB free, That's still only ~6 hours, which isn't enough for one day with me.

 

then get a device with bigger storage or slap in a SD card.

[Hyydrah]

then get a device with bigger storage or slap in a SD card.

It's not that simple when music isn't the only thing eating away at storage. I'm someone that doesn't listen to more than 100 songs so it would work better for me, but the people that I know do, however, and for them, FLACs aren't a feasible solution for them with the current storage capacities available