IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Best way to save files losslessly?
bsmooth
post Jun 29 2011, 17:29
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 22
Joined: 20-June 11
Member No.: 91678



I was going to do this with WAv files, but since I am using EAC. Is Flac the best way to save music without losing any quality?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Jun 29 2011, 17:36
Post #2





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5275
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



“[T]he best way” as in…? All lossless audio preserves quality entirely and bit-for-bit, as I hope is obvious from the term lossless. FLAC is the most widely supported nonproprietary lossless format, if compatibility is your concern.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Satellite_6
post Jun 29 2011, 17:46
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 13-September 10
From: VA, USA
Member No.: 83831



You might as well use FLAC instead of wave.


--------------------
People are silly.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DVDdoug
post Jun 29 2011, 20:06
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 2565
Joined: 24-August 07
From: Silicon Valley
Member No.: 46454



Besides smaller file size, the major advantage is that tagging (Title, artist, album, album art, year, etc...) is standardized for FLAC (and ALAC), but not for WAV.

There is also a 2GB (or 4GB?) file size limit for WAV, but not for FLAC/ALAC. (You'll never run into limit when ripping CDs, but it can become an issue with "concert length" files, or long high-resolution files, or long multichannel files.)


The only advantage of WAV is that it's more universal and, like MP3, it will "play everywhere". But if you have FLAC or ALAC files, you can easily convert to WAV if it ever becomes necessary.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Anakunda
post Jun 29 2011, 23:07
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 456
Joined: 24-November 08
Member No.: 63072



The 2GB limitation for WAV files is pointless for CD audio ripping since the extracted audio never can go over 800MB.
It only may concern when ripping vinyl comes to task or DVDA
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
derty2
post Jun 29 2011, 23:56
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 581
Joined: 5-June 11
Member No.: 91257



I have also noted... many people who rip vinyl at very high resolutions, compress the music files as WAVPACK (.wv) rather than FLAC.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bsmooth
post Jun 30 2011, 02:25
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 22
Joined: 20-June 11
Member No.: 91678



I've also heard FLAC is also supported by Windows Media Player. Is this true?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Jun 30 2011, 12:33
Post #8





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5275
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



QUOTE (derty2 @ Jun 29 2011, 23:56) *
I have also noted... many people who rip vinyl at very high resolutions, compress the music files as WAVPACK (.wv) rather than FLAC.
Your point? Both are lossless formats, and users are free to use whichever format they please.

QUOTE (bsmooth @ Jun 30 2011, 02:25) *
I've also heard FLAC is also supported by Windows Media Player. Is this true?
Not officially, but there are third-party extensions to enable FLAC use. The official site is a good place to start looking.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
xnor
post Jun 30 2011, 15:23
Post #9





Group: Developer
Posts: 567
Joined: 29-April 11
From: Austria
Member No.: 90198



see Lossless comparison

This post has been edited by xnor: Jun 30 2011, 15:24
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ghost note
post Jul 3 2011, 08:54
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 40
Joined: 1-March 06
Member No.: 28164



It's not a question of what lossless audio codec you choose, but a question of configuration.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Destroid
post Jul 3 2011, 20:37
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 548
Joined: 4-June 02
Member No.: 2220



The original poster is extracting audio CD's with EAC, so arguably the "best" way is just to store as .WAV with external cue sheet, or use a file naming system on individual .WAV of tracks. Obvious advantages to this method are: no compatibility issues; no waiting for files to compress; virtually no decompression overhead; and avoiding the whole area of debate about about which codec/settings is better along with any other arguments regarding codecs. Obvious disadvantages: no native error-detection; no native tagging; no space savings, even on the track with 8 minutes of digital silence before the hidden end-of-CD song. Those disadvantages don't amount to much if you store your data on trustworthy media, use a cue sheet or file naming scheme for metadata and if space is not an issue (I just got a 1.5 TB drive for $65 last week).


--------------------
"Something bothering you, Mister Spock?"
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bsmooth
post Jul 4 2011, 17:43
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 22
Joined: 20-June 11
Member No.: 91678



Most files are simply ripped from the CD and stored on my hard drive. however some CD's are so poorly recorded, I may want to edit them. I have Audacity and tried using Windows Media Adio Lossless, however Audity cannot edit these files. I listen to a lot of Jethro Tull, and many of his earlier recordings are documented as having issues. It still amazes me that even as far back as 15-20 years ago, saving music digitally wasn't standardized then, and yet still even today the better ways of saving music digitally, are very much in the beta stage. I guess even in the days of LP's and cassette tapes, there were always options. It just seems even now, there are almost too many options. probelem with that is everyone is going off in seperate directions, so instead of settling on one way and concentrating on making that better, we have umpteen ways and try and improve all of them.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 22nd August 2014 - 02:15