If wav. is lossless...

[Ben_Taylor]

Then why do traders bother using FLAC in audio conversions?

Surely it would be much easier to just cut flac out of the usual wav > flac > conversions, and save a lot of time spent downloading and uploading?

There's probably a really simple reason that I've overlooked in asking this question, but so far it's escaped me. :lol

Any help is greatly appreciated!!

[sadu]

wav files are larger then flac...it's the same sound @ smaller file size

[Ben_Taylor]

Ah, that makes sense. Cheers! :)

[Jimmy17]

you can also tag information with flac files cant you?

[Five]

yes

[rerem]

bandwidth is the main reason,time needed to dl or up a file. Wave is not a lossless compression,so it's generally not called "lossless",it's the original item as opposed to an encoded condensed form :)

[Billster]

Well, and just to be thorough:

Folks so far have answered this from the perspective of torrenting - i.e. flac is smaller than wav and both are identical - but there's very good, non-torrent-related reasons for converting masters or known generations to flac or shn and propagating them that way, vs. keeping them in wav.

I.e. in wav, DAE - digital audio extraction - and burning audio back to CD - is needed every time you want to copy the disc.

It's preferable to minimize the need for DAE and burning of audio because this allows true "lossiness" or artifacts to creep into the picture since it's difficult to extract an identical copy unless using the best software and a compliant CD drive; and many burners introduce artifacts or outright gaps in the re-burning process.

But when the show is encoded as data in shn or flac, this data can simply be copied endlessly with no fear of loss of audio information.

Additionally, shn or flac shows typically have attached text files which would include information about the taper, setlist, lineage of the show, generation, and anything else appropriate.

This allows me to receive a show from you in perfect confidence that I now have exactly the show you have and the information we both know about the show is true for both of us.

[Rider]

Well, and just to be thorough:

Folks so far have answered this from the perspective of torrenting - i.e. flac is smaller than wav and both are identical - but there's very good, non-torrent-related reasons for converting masters or known generations to flac or shn and propagating them that way, vs. keeping them in wav.

I.e. in wav, DAE - digital audio extraction - and burning audio back to CD - is needed every time you want to copy the disc.

It's preferable to minimize the need for DAE and burning of audio because this allows true "lossiness" or artifacts to creep into the picture since it's difficult to extract an identical copy unless using the best software and a compliant CD drive; and many burners introduce artifacts or outright gaps in the re-burning process.

But when the show is encoded as data in shn or flac, this data can simply be copied endlessly with no fear of loss of audio information.

Additionally, shn or flac shows typically have attached text files which would include information about the taper, setlist, lineage of the show, generation, and anything else appropriate.

This allows me to receive a show from you in perfect confidence that I now have exactly the show you have and the information we both know about the show is true for both of us.


Very nice post but you can do the same with wav files as long as you burn them as data, so your answer is not really on topic.

[Billster]

Very nice post but you can do the same with wav files as long as you burn them as data, so your answer is not really on topic.
I see, thanks for clearing that up :wave: I'll refrain from putting in my two cents.

[kidrocklive]

I got a question, I noticed that Nero can burn files flac straight to cdr, is there any point to decoding the flac back to wav then putting them on the cd as opposed to just putting the flac onto a cd?

[brimstone]

I got a question, I noticed that Nero can burn files flac straight to cdr, is there any point to decoding the flac back to wav then putting them on the cd as opposed to just putting the flac onto a cd?

No, there is no difference. Nero just decodes the flac files for you so you don't have to do it yourself.

[Teralus]

My worry is that burning straight from flac....maybe the nero plug-in won't be using the most recent version of the flac codec! Then there may be errors in the conversion, I found that with DBpoweramp the flac converter made little popping sounds with files encoded with the new flac codec...so I think it is safest to always use flac front-end to convert...making sure you have the most recent version!

[jcrab66]

Very nice post but you can do the same with wav files as long as you burn them as data, so your answer is not really on topic.

ahh, now theres a typical post from the rider that everyone knows and loves :rolleyes:

[Billster]

ahh, now theres a typical post from the rider that everyone knows and loves :rolleyes:

Yeah, I looked around and was able to find, without effort, 2-3 other posts, within Technobabble, in a 24 hour period that were a lot more "off topic" than mine was, without any concerns from Rider, so I wondered why I got the honor of getting such a nastygram :)

Either way, it's not worth it....I'll be damned if I'm going to make a post in which I'm trying to help folks, only to get my hand chewed off by a mod. I'll stick to just trading.

[AAR.oner]

tho my opinion matters very little, i appreciate any and all help with answering ?s in Techno...so post away Bill, whether on topic or not :wave:

[Five]

^what aar said