|
Music format for ripping CD's (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| boris_the_bear |
| flac for PC. not sure which mp3 playes read flac though |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by boris_the_bear
flac for PC. not sure which mp3 playes read flac though |
Very few. iPod (1-5.5) with custom firmware, all Cowon players, all iRiver players iirc, and I think a select few others. |
|
|
| CGRumler |
| quote: | Originally posted by gehzumteufel
Are you serious?! That is whack! |
Yup, I just got that confirmed.
WMA Lossless is the next best option, in terms of sound quality. |
|
|
| boris_the_bear |
| quote: | Originally posted by CGRumler
WMA Lossless is the next best option, in terms of sound quality. |
theoretically, any lossless format is equal in sound quality as it is LOSSLESS |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by CGRumler
Yup, I just got that confirmed.
WMA Lossless is the next best option, in terms of sound quality. |
Wow, that is just a major fail. How can a player NOT support wav?! It is the easiest format to support! |
|
|
| CGRumler |
| quote: | Originally posted by boris_the_bear
theoretically, any lossless format is equal in sound quality as it is LOSSLESS |
While that sounds like perfect logic, I was looking at statistics in different file formats.
Specifically, this one dude ripped a copy of "Daft Punk - One More Time" in two different formats: WMA Lossless and WAV.
The WAV file was almost 10 MB larger than the WMA Lossless version.
:conf: |
|
|
| CGRumler |
| quote: | Originally posted by gehzumteufel
Wow, that is just a major fail. How can a player NOT support wav?! It is the easiest format to support! |
I'm sure Microsoft did it to help promote their WMA format. :( |
|
|
| boris_the_bear |
| you're talking about size efficiency. yes, ofcourse WAV is the bulkiest format as it is zero compressed. FLAC and APE are both lossless formats (both equal soundwise) with different compression ratios. something like that. |
|
|
| CGRumler |
| quote: | Originally posted by boris_the_bear
you're talking about size efficiency. yes, ofcourse WAV is the bulkiest format as it is zero compressed. FLAC and APE are both lossless formats (both equal soundwise) with different compression ratios. something like that. |
The Lossless format is still relatively new to me. I haven't messed with it before, up until less than a month ago. |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by CGRumler
While that sounds like perfect logic, I was looking at statistics in different file formats.
Specifically, this one dude ripped a copy of "Daft Punk - One More Time" in two different formats: WMA Lossless and WAV.
The WAV file was almost 10 MB larger than the WMA Lossless version.
:conf: |
WMA Lossless uses FILE compression, hence the smaller file size. This guy that did this "review" is clueless.
I can rip a song that will be a 50MB wav file, and in FLAC it will be 28MB or so. |
|
|
| boris_the_bear |
| file size also depends on the resolution (16-bit, 24-bit) and sample rate (44100, 48000, 96000, 192000 hz). flac supports both 16-bit and 24-bit resolution while remaining compressed which is pretty handy for archiving stuff like record rips etc. |
|
|
|
|
