Audio Formats

[Bloodcinder]

What formats do you use or prefer for digital audio? Why? FIGHT

[Mydra]

Well, I use all kind of formats. I prefer flacs, but often I?m happy to get anything. I just ripped few old cds to flacs that I could listen them(Mydra doesn?t have a cd player).

I have some TTAs, APEs, Wavepacks as lossless codecs(no alacs, yet...), some aacs, many oggs and mp3s. That?s what I remember, and what has walked against me. There may be yet something else. I usually just listen music.

[Seegtease]

Gah, good VBR is just fine. I don't understand the obsession with FLAC, unless you have uber internet and 10 hard drives. You'd have to have sonic hearing to tell the difference between FLAC and a good quality VBR.

[Bloodcinder]

MP3 is proprietary and FLAC is not. As popular as MP3 is, it's not even a legal compression method in all areas. So there are some reasons to use something like FLAC.

I recently began re-ripping my music and I tried both 320 bitrate MP3's and FLAC's. I couldn't hear the difference, but I also don't mind using MP3.

[Arainach]

BC, in that case the competitor to MP3 would be OGG. FLAC, like any lossless codec, is in a whole other boat.

I rip a lot of my symphonic and other well-mastered stuff in FLAC because I have both craploads of hard drive space and an excellent audio system. If you have plain old PC speakers or headphones, you won't notice the difference, but with a good setup, why not have all the quality you can?

[Bloodcinder]

Hmm... split off to a new thread. I think it's a worthy topic.

BC, in that case the competitor to MP3 would be OGG. FLAC, like any lossless codec, is in a whole other boat.
1) I was specifically addressing MP3 versus FLAC with Zeit. I know they're not really parallel, comparable formats.

2) OGG sucks monkey butt-ass balls.

I rip a lot of my symphonic and other well-mastered stuff in FLAC because I have both craploads of hard drive space and an excellent audio system. If you have plain old PC speakers or headphones, you won't notice the difference, but with a good setup, why not have all the quality you can?
Given the "if you have a good setup" qualifier, there's certainly no reason not to go with the highest quality you can have. However, not everybody has "craploads of hard drive space" or "an excellent audio system." So... it's not like FLAC is the only valid way to go.

I personally go with MP3 because my car stereo plays MP3 CD's. I've not seen any models that play FLAC. I would switch to FLAC if I had such a system, though.

[Seegtease]

Wait, somebody "owns" mp3? So nobody is supposed to be using it without permission?

Also, are there multiple types of "lossless" codecs? If so, why? Can you get any less lost than lossless?

[Arainach]

Yes, the MP3 algorithm is technically patented by someone (think it's patent rather than copyright, I forget).

There are multiple types of lossless compression because each have their strengths. Some create smaller files and are better for archival. Some take less CPU to decode and are better for portable players or low-end machines. Etc., etc.

Just like how there's .tar, .zip, gzip, .arc, .7z and god knows how many lossless (non-audio) codecs out there....even though they do the same thing they have their own strengths and weaknesses.

[Bloodcinder]

"Lossless" just means there's no degradation. Doesn't mean there's only one way to do it. For example, ZIP versus RAR in the realm of regular file compression.

And the best thing I can say about MP3 legality is for you to read this (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mp3#Licensing_and_patent_issues). Basically, it's just got a tainted history.

EDIT: OMG ARY U AND I R TWINS

[Gio Takahashi]

I prefer MP3 but I've used OGG too.

[Seegtease]

So basically, every use that hasn't paid royalties to the developer of mp3 is doing something illegal, but there's so many people using mp3 that you'd have to arrest/fine the whole planet to enforce it?

[Arainach]

Negative. The royalties are owed by the people that develop the software that use the algorithm, not by the people who use the software.

[Killer_Man_]

MP3s, OGG, I don't care as long as it sounds good.

To be honest, I hear no difference between MP3, OGG, FLAC and etc.

Though I do believe my Zune supports OGG and MP3s.

[Seegtease]

So what, legally (not necessarily whether or not anybody cares), does it mean if I rip an mp3 off of a CD using, I dunno, Winamp, for example? Or if I sing a song, and record it as mp3 with some random recording software? I find it all very confusing, and that wiki explanation was about as clear as mud to me.

[Mydra]

Gah, good VBR is just fine. I don't understand the obsession with FLAC, unless you have uber internet and 10 hard drives. You'd have to have sonic hearing to tell the difference between FLAC and a good quality VBR.

I often listen classical music, and I can say there’s huge difference between 256kb/s mp3 and lossless audio.



2) OGG sucks monkey butt-ass balls.



Ok, ogg _may_ not be as good as aac(I don’t know current status), but there’s no need to compare mp3 and ogg. Ogg wins.

I don’t have even decent audio system(it could be called hifi, if someone wants... Cheap external amplifier and two speakers) but I can say I hear difference between bad and good audio.

I don’t say I really benefit from lossless audio, but you can put to 100G space about 500 cds. It’s not small amount, if you even listen them occasionally. 500G drive costs ~50€, so that means you can store 2500 albums with 50€. You can’t call it costy.

It’s a bit different with general mass pop/rock/metal which audio quality may be crap even on cd(i.e one metallica’s cd has worse audio quality than these tracks in a game...) and these don’? vary that much that extra large bitrate would benefit with them.

[Gio Takahashi]

the main reason that the formats really don't matter to me is that I doubt that -I- can hear the differences due to my hearing, if there is, It would have to be very, very obvious as hell for me to notice a different.

[Arainach]

I often listen classical music, and I can say there?s huge difference between 256kb/s mp3 and lossless audio.He didn't say 256, he said VBR. Which no one can hear a distinct difference over.Ok, ogg _may_ not be as good as aac(I don?t know current status), but there?s no need to compare mp3 and ogg. Ogg wins....no, BC was right and OGG sucks ass compared to MP3.

[Bloodcinder]

...no, BC was right and OGG sucks ass compared to MP3.
I believe the actual term was "monkey butt-ass balls."

[Mydra]

He didn't say 256, he said VBR. Which no one can hear a distinct difference over....


—.—


no, BC was right and OGG sucks ass compared to MP3.

x2

[Arainach]

I'm confused; did you just try to second my comment disagreeing with your statment?

[Bloodcinder]

I'm confused; did you just try to second my comment disagreeing with your statment?
QFT

[Gio Takahashi]

It's Mydra. it's confusing as hell most of the time.

[Seegtease]

I think he meant to make another one of those sleepy faces?