What in the heck is a FLAC file???!!!

To many ads? Support ODJT and see no ads!
G

Guest

Guest
Someone just emailed me a copy of a speech I have been wanting to listen too, and it is in .flac format. I cant seem to get it play anywhere.

What is this format, and how can I convert it to mp3 so I can use it on my ipod?
 
Winamp is the swiss army knife of audio playback.

I prefer FLAC or OggVorbis myself.
 
Trader's Little Helper is my goto for unpacking or converting FLAC and other formats.

You can either unpack to uncompressed WAV to stay lossless, or just decode straight to MP3 without the intermediate step of unpacking it.

Also has all kinds of other cool utilities.
 
Media Monkey will rip to FLAC, tag FLAC, play FLAC, and convert FLAC to any other format it understands.
 
Just commentary here, since it's late, and I have Dale's Pale Ale, and I feel like throwing out some stuff :)


Flac and Ogg were fantastic formats (if you read a certain Wolfs books). But they died as I had predicted long ago.

The simple reason they died, is because they were open source. Open source is maniacally inefficient, because there are too many people involved, and no standards.

Only two formats have survived -- MP3 and AAC.

AAC will die next... ;)
 
AAC is used in the broadcast industry, so it will be here a bit longer I think.
 
i'll stay with mp3's
 
I use flac when ripping my cd's. Playback is exactly what is on a cd since it's lossless.
 
all my mp3's are encoded at 320 and thats where I keep them, unless sending them out...
 
I rip to WAV, then encode what I need to 320 CBR MP3.

Flac is still encoded and encased, even though essentially lossless. Not a great playback format, although it can save you some space. On the other hand, it still has to be decoded, so it still costs you in the long run...


The only formats I concern myself with are WAV and MP3 -- they can be played on any hardware and/or software. No worries :)
 
SoftJock Rick said:
I rip to WAV, then encode what I need to 320 CBR MP3.

Flac is still encoded and encased, even though essentially lossless. Not a great playback format, although it can save you some space. On the other hand, it still has to be decoded, so it still costs you in the long run...


The only formats I concern myself with are WAV and MP3 -- they can be played on any hardware and/or software. No worries :)
Click to expand...


And this guy gets compliments on his sound all the time....Thanks Rick!
 
SoftJock Rick said:
Flac is still encoded and encased, even though essentially lossless. Not a great playback format, although it can save you some space. On the other hand, it still has to be decoded, so it still costs you in the long run...
Click to expand...

ALL music is in a "wav" format as it passes through a computer sound card, regardless of the original source.

Wav requires no processing, and can be sent directly to a sound card.

FLAC takes much less processing to convert to wav compared to an mp3. It is about 1/4 as many operations.

There is a general lack of FLAC enabled DJ software players. I think that will change over time.

FLAC is lossless, 55-65% the size of a wav file, and fully taggable. Wav's are not taggable...at least not inside the wav file format. BUT, the real value of FLAC is for archive storage.

In theory, once I have FLAC, I will never need to put that CD in the tray again. Since I have ripped my full collection 4 times (160CBR, 192CBR, 224CBR, FLAC)...that has some advantage. In each case, the bitrate was a compromise between storage space, and the overall quality of the signal chain. I improved the signal chain, or storage got a lot cheaper, and I would rerip. No more. Now I have FLAC, and my computer can just spend an overnight doing the conversion.

I do convert to mp3 @ 224 CBR for DJing, and mp3 @160 for my portable music player. In both cases, I can not tell a difference between that and a wav on the full signal chain. If I happen to improve the signal chain, I can go back to the FLAC files and re-encode at another bit rate.
 
My software of choice is fully flac capable and it is what I use. I also have all my cd's ripped to flack in my media computer which also serves as a media server so i can enjoy full quality music all over the house.
 
soundinmotiondj said:
ALL music is in a "wav" format as it passes through a computer sound card, regardless of the original source.

Wav requires no processing, and can be sent directly to a sound card.

Incorrect -- WAV files are still an encapsulation container -- but the samples within, haven't been manipulated in any way. The decoder still has to extract the samples from the chunks, prior to sending to the sound card.



FLAC takes much less processing to convert to wav compared to an mp3. It is about 1/4 as many operations.

I have not seen any appreciable difference in the decode time in my tests...


There is a general lack of FLAC enabled DJ software players. I think that will change over time.

Yes -- it will get less IMHO. My software can decode and play FLAC, but I have it disabled, along with many other formats it can play. Strictly a financial decision on my part, as it raises support costs, and lowers ROI.


FLAC is lossless, 55-65% the size of a wav file, and fully taggable. Wav's are not taggable...at least not inside the wav file format. BUT, the real value of FLAC is for archive storage.

WAVs are fully taggable -- but there's no standard. If you look at the format of a WAV container, you will see that it is possible to put anything you want in there (including compressed data). Nobody made any effort to do so, because they were too big in the days of expensive storage, to have any ROI for building a tagging standard.


In theory, once I have FLAC, I will never need to put that CD in the tray again. Since I have ripped my full collection 4 times (160CBR, 192CBR, 224CBR, FLAC)...that has some advantage. IN each case, the bitrate was a compromise between storage space, and the overall quality of the signal chain. I improved the signal chain, or storage got a lot cheaper, and I would rerip. No more. Now I have FLAC, and my computer can just spend an overnight doing the conversion.

I do convert to mp3 @ 224 CBR for DJing, and mp3 @160 for my portable music player. In both cases, I can not tell a difference between that and a wav on the full signal chain. If I happen to improve the signal chain, I can go back to the FLAC files and re-encode at another bit rate.
Click to expand...


Couple notes above :)

I do the same, only I use WAV as the format of choice. I can play them as is on any playback device. I use MP3s for DJ work, just for the space saving effect -- I don't like using external hard drives, and the sound quality (IMHO), is more than sufficient given the noise floor at our events.

FLAC has been around for quite some time, and has not made any headway, and in fact seems to have lost ground over time. I can't see investing the time, and my library integrity, into a format that will never go mainstream...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back