Different compression levels for FLAC

Yes and no

Nope  - but then I transcode to WAV when streaming.

Simon

FLAC No compression sounds better than any of FLAC 0 - FLAC 8

cheers

aleg

Agree, no compression best.

no difference whatsoever.

I preferred FLAC to WAV and non compression best for FLAC. I also thought that Extreme Pro SDHC cards better than standard SDHC cards for delivering stored music. Maybe it's in the mind or maybe I just have better hearing......wooooof wooooof

How do you create uncompressed Flac files? My DBPoweramp only seems to do compressed Flac 1-8.

thanks,

Alex

Just fired up my copy of dBpoweramp, and lossless level zero is actually there just above level 1.  I used to rip to that level, but when using Asset to transcode, I can't actually hear any difference between level 0 and the compressed levels, so now rip to level 5 (higher levels don't offer much more compression and take much longer to encode, in my experience)

The compression level just makes the files smaller. The higher the compression level (8 being highest level), the smaller the file. Higher compression levels also take longer to encode. So if process speed is important you may want to consider that.

Since the FLAC format is lossless audio quality should be the same at all compression levels.

Lossless Uncompressed is right at the bottom of the list, below level 8 

Level 0 is still compressed and is NOT the same as Uncompressed!!!

Cheers

Aleg

Only if you believe that digital audio is just about 'bits'.

Well if I create a FLAC file from a CD using dbpoweramp at level 5 (default) compression and the "Rip Status" is "Accurate" then yes it's just about the bits.

That's what I mean indeed, if you only look in a static way at the bits than there will be no difference, all lossless format will convert back to the same set of PCM bits.

but digital audio playback is about processing bits and then processing flac or processing wav do require different processing and can result in different sound quality (for some).

No Dave, It isn't just about the bits. Programs that read bits are not the same as programs that play bits. Being bit perfect according to Accurate Rip, or anything else, does not mean you get the same sound. Timing and electrical/magnetic interference are important, even if you yourself can't hear them. Otherwise a FLAC uncompressed rip would play exactly the same as a WAV. And time and again it simply doesn't. You need to get your head round the fact that one file is not identical to another. The laws of physics make that impossible, no matter what computer buffs might tell you. You will or you won't.  I can hear it, others can too.

Andy

Aleg / AndyPat

I stand by my earlier posts which was with regard to ripping in FLAC using dbpoweramp. In my exprience I've found no audibe difference between FLAC and ALAC rips. It works for me. You "golden eared" audiophiles can argue about it if you wish. I've got too much good music to listen to waste time on this issue.

PS AndyPat: I choose to ignore the patronising tone of your post.

I've got too much good music to listen to waste time on this issue.

...but you are wasting time a little bit on this forum are you not? 

Thanks for the inputs. So the general consensus there are no differences in the audio quality between compression levels. I am well aware that it is lossless so in theory the same data will be created again after decompression but we all know the decompression overheads in the streamer is known to introduce noise so my question was coming from that angle.

Of course, I am not asking if wav sounds better!

Since reading this thread I checked my DBPoweramp V14 and found no lossless option just Flac 0-8. Checked for updates and upgraded to V14.4 and lo and behold lossless is now there !

Not going to re-rip everything doh ! - but, Aleg, you'd say its worth re-ripping a few of my most favourite CDs to notice a slight improvement

You shouldn't need to re-rip - just batch convert all your music using DBPa. I've never done this as I can't hear a difference because I transcode to WAV but if it won't convert from level of  FLAC compression to another then convert to another lossless format and then back to uncompressed FLAC if that's what you want. Transcoding is the way to go IMHO as I can hear a difference between FLAC and WAV and you get the best of all worlds.

So it does - Thanks for the tip Pev

Engjoo

that is my angle as well.

So I say uncompressed flac sounds better than any of the flac compression levels 0-8.

As far as I'm concerned there is no general consensus, you're not going to hear me say there is no difference ;-)

cheers

aleg

I've been ripping my CDs with XLD into FLAC files with 0 compression, they sound very good to me. But the other day a mate of mine told me he could hear a difference between AIFF and FLAC files.

We did some listening on his system (AudirvanaPlus/MyTek/Music First Audio/Chord/B&W 802D) and found that we both thought the sound of the AIFF version sounded better and more open.

We then performed blind tests to see if we could pick out which was which... and we couldn't.

The FLAC and AIFF and WAV files sound identical, when you don't actually know which is which.

But don't take my word for it, try it for yourself and if you can hear a difference, great.

So, tell me know you GoldenEared ones

How do you KNOW one level of compression sounds better than another rather than just THINKING or convincing yourself - but not necessarily others - that it does

As DomTom says, blind testing is the only way to really test and then apply a statistical confidence interval to a sufficiently large sample (I would think 100s of identical clips) to determine whether you really have Golden Ears or Golden Imagination