FLAC Compression - file size difference (specific situation)

[Staxxx]

Apologies for the OT post: I find my musical enjoyment has gone the MTV way.....
With the ease of access of tracks due to digitizing, I rarely listen to an album through and through any more.
I heard one the other day - and it struck me it had been months since I had done that !

 

[IndianEars]

Hi jtaylor999

What is the rest of yr system ? What DAC are you using ?

If you are chasing True high end, its my (controversial) opinion that the least compressed is better.

A drop from 70 GB to 67 GB is Useless. Its not going to save you a new HDD. That space will just be lying empty on yr HDD.

To my ears and on my system, a WAV file sounds FAR superior. Also playing the same file from the Primary HDD sounds better that playing it from a USB HDD.

Yesssss...... Very controversial opinions, but they are my observations. YMMV.

Cheers

 

[mowgli80]

The higher the compression, the more work your computer has to do to uncompress the file.

In case of flac, higher compression need not necessarily mean more work to uncompress. Moreover, as noted here, the difference is very small to be measured or noticed.

Whilst the result should be exactly the same, some suggest that that extra load on the CPu might have some effect on the sound.

I am not sure the alternate i.e. wav can be considered better. wav files are larger which means hard drives need to do the extra work. You just transferred your load from a fast CPU to a hard drive which is orders of magnitude slower and introduces lot more noise compared to a CPU because of its mechanical nature. Theoretically, a flac should sound better than a wav, unless I am missing the bigger picture.

 

[Nikhil]

... Theoretically, a flac should sound better than a wav, unless I am missing the bigger picture.

Except that WAV does sound better as experienced by FMs Bhagwan, Staxxx and IndianEars.
Fact is their systems are "orders of magnitude" above and beyond most in implementation.

Getting into why they shouldn't sound better theoretically is contrary to experience
But why let facts get into the way of a good "theoretical discussion"

 

[ranjeetrain]

Getting into why they shouldn't sound better is simply not even up for discussion ...
But why let facts get into the way of a good "theoretical discussion"

Not really.

Someone owning resolving gear is no guarantee of them

(1) judging correctly
(2) not falling for psychoacoustics/placebo
(3) not being prone to human tendency of justifying their expenses that were not due

Besides, if someone isn't open to discussion, and willing to accept that they are human too and that they can err too and that their perceptions might be wrong, and that their observations will be subjected to interrogation/inspection/analysis, they shouldn't go on a public forum posting their opinion.


It is unfortunate that someone will even think just because some people perceive a difference it will become an established truth; and that it will be accepted as discoveries made by a few subjects possibly fallen prey to placebo; who want the rest of the world to believe that tens of thousands of engineers and scientist putting millions of hours and billions of dollars every year in research are idiots. Logic, engineering, science everything is zero. A small bunch of people who have spent money on expensive gear and have put time and effort in things that wouldn't bear fruit are heroes.

 

[Nikhil]

Sure I can accept that ... I should change the way I worded it.

 

[ranjeetrain]

Nikhil, at home I only own a mid-fi 2-channel. But I have heard at length more expensive systems than any well-known FM's setup here. Call me cloth eared, but I am yet to hear the difference between WAV and FLAC. I carry a set of self-ripped WAV and level 8 compressed FLAC during all my serious auditions. I have heard all other major type of differences that are talked about, but not in WAV and FLAC.

It sounds unbelievable to me that someone might actually be hearing difference between WAV and FLAC. Such a distinction can only be made by specific playback hardware/software. And such phenomena can only be specific to that specific hardware/software, can't be passed off as generic rule.

You may want to dig deeper into this topic, anyone interested can. Analyze if such a difference is real, and if found to be real, examine the chain. I am 99.99% certain in all these cases there would be either an underpowered/low spec'ced hardware or very specific hardware/software combination.

 

[Nikhil]

Ranjeetrain I already have. For the past two months I have been looking at digital medial and its been a roller coaster ride with the different resolutions and file formats. I am very familiar with the TAS #219 FLAC vs WAV (fiasco) discussion. No plans to get into another one on here.

What I am discovering is that in some cases the files aren't always what they say they are. In that the original source is very important. From that point of view, uncompressed files seem to be more untouched and closer to the original.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

uncompressed files seem to be more untouched and closer to the original.

That is the whole point. I feel the same too. Well, as per above, rather than WAV to FLAC, I feel it between FLAC and high-bit-rate MP3 --- but it is just another example of the same thing: it is the feeling that counts.

Personally, I find investigating the feelings as interesting as any other hifi component. That's why my sig. But that's where the war breaks out.

I too prefer things untouched. Just our definition of untouched, the boundary, is in a different place. It's probably not such a big difference between us,

 

[Staxxx]

I agree with Thad above about the difference, as I have not theoretical backing for it. Rather than a FLAC versus WAV issue, the bigger issue appears also to be the quality of the recording itself in each case - and I have always maintained that, even more so when it comes to the resolution war.
However, the FLACs that I buy from this one particular site (which may not be a representation of all FLAC files) which I know to be highly compressed after speaking to the vendor, is distinctly sub-par - to such an extent that I think very hard about buying anything from there even though it is cheaper than the other sites that I use. Were this the case with one recording I would certainly blame the recording but it seems to be the case all the time .....just wondering why?

 

[Staxxx]

Not really.

Someone owning resolving gear is no guarantee of them

(1) judging correctly
(2) not falling for psychoacoustics/placebo
(3) not being prone to human tendency of justifying their expenses that were not due

Besides, if someone isn't open to discussion, and willing to accept that they are human too and that they can err too and that their perceptions might be wrong, and that their observations will be subjected to interrogation/inspection/analysis, they shouldn't go on a public forum posting their opinion.


It is unfortunate that someone will even think just because some people perceive a difference it will become an established truth; and that it will be accepted as discoveries made by a few subjects possibly fallen prey to placebo; who want the rest of the world to believe that tens of thousands of engineers and scientist putting millions of hours and billions of dollars every year in research are idiots. Logic, engineering, science everything is zero. A small bunch of people who have spent money on expensive gear and have put time and effort in things that wouldn't bear fruit are heroes.

I also think your post is slightly unfair....there are plenty of talented engineers, scientists and designers putting work and effort into very expensive gear. I do concede that some of it is expensive for a reason and some not - but you cannot dismiss progress and invention by its pricing!
I hope this makes sense. I don't buy because of its price - otherwise I would not have just got some Harbeths at one fifth the price of my other speakers. I look for a certain enjoyment from my system and I have the luxury (or had in the past) to get it irrespective of price.

 

[Nikhil]

Such a distinction can only be made by specific playback hardware/software. And such phenomena can only be specific to that specific hardware/software, can't be passed off as generic rule.

I see some areas of agreement here ... its probably highly system specific.

 

[Nikhil]

I think we've overstayed our welcome on the OP.
If there's interest we should take the WAV discussion to a new thread.

Cheers!

 

[Staxxx]

I think we've overstayed our welcome on the OP.
If there's interest we should take the WAV discussion to a new thread.

Cheers!

Agreed - and sorry to the OP.

 

[ranjeetrain]

I also think your post is slightly unfair....there are plenty of talented engineers, scientists and designers putting work and effort into very expensive gear. I do concede that some of it is expensive for a reason and some not - but you cannot dismiss progress and invention by its pricing!
I hope this makes sense. I don't buy because of its price - otherwise I would not have just got some Harbeths at one fifth the price of my other speakers. I look for a certain enjoyment from my system and I have the luxury (or had in the past) to get it irrespective of price.

Stax, I didn't intend to dismiss any engineers. I have total respect for all technologists. If it wasn't for inventors and the likes we would still be living in caves.

HOWEVER, when it comes to audiophilia, I hope you'd agree that, there are a lot of marketing gurus posing as engineers and technicians. Who doesn't know about a USD 5 Ethernet cable being sold for USD 500+ in the name of engineering and innovation? My comment is very specific to those engineers. I dismiss the ideas propagated by those marketing gurus posing as engineers. I hope you see my point.

Wrt hearing the differences, what I am suggesting is that - anyone who hears the difference (please don't take it as 'you', I mean anyone who does), should come out with sufficient details that will provide a convincing platform for people. Saying - "WAV is far superior than FLAC" is a very highly controversial statement. It will always be, because more than 99.99% people think otherwise, engineering/science says otherwise.

I still have to see people coming out clearly with specifics of which music/music system they heard the difference with. If someone hears difference between different recordings acquired from different sources then inferring that the difference is due to WAV and FLAC is misplaced. On the contrary if someone hears no difference between different recordings acquired from different sources then his systems isn't resolving enough.

I hope my point is clear.

PS: Please, it's a discussion on the merits/demerits of file formats. I mean no personal remarks. Just want to clarify in case there is any misunderstanding.

 

[ranjeetrain]

I think we've overstayed our welcome on the OP.
If there's interest we should take the WAV discussion to a new thread.

Cheers!

Agreed - and sorry to the OP.

+1. Apologies to the OP.

 

[IndianEars]

ranjeetrain said

Besides, if someone isn't open to discussion, and willing to accept that they are human too and that they can err too and that their perceptions might be wrong, and that their observations will be subjected to interrogation/inspection/analysis, they shouldn't go on a public forum posting their opinion.


It is unfortunate that someone will even think just because some people perceive a difference it will become an established truth; and that it will be accepted as discoveries made by a few subjects possibly fallen prey to placebo; who want the rest of the world to believe that tens of thousands of engineers and scientist putting millions of hours and billions of dollars every year in research are idiots. Logic, engineering, science everything is zero. A small bunch of people who have spent money on expensive gear and have put time and effort in things that wouldn't bear fruit are heroes.

Whoa ! Sir.

That is a Huge (and unjustified IMHO) purple prose rant, that is pointing thinly veiled fingers at my post.

I wonder on what basis you said :

if someone isn't open to discussion, and willing to accept that they are human too and that they can err too and that their perceptions might be wrong, and that their observations will be subjected to interrogation/inspection/analysis, they shouldn't go on a public forum posting their opinion.

and

............A small bunch of people who have spent money on expensive gear and have put time and effort in things that wouldn't bear fruit are heroes.

Please Do take the pains to read my post where I have put forth my views ( just as you are entitled to your ). Do re read the portions I have highlighted in BOLD... because it seems to have apparently skipped your reading ....

IndianEars said:

Hi jtaylor999

What is the rest of yr system ? What DAC are you using ?

If you are chasing True high end, its my (controversial) opinion that the least compressed is better.

A drop from 70 GB to 67 GB is Useless. Its not going to save you a new HDD. That space will just be lying empty on yr HDD.

To my ears and on my system, a WAV file sounds FAR superior. Also playing the same file from the Primary HDD sounds better that playing it from a USB HDD.

Yesssss...... Very controversial opinions, but they are my observations. YMMV.

Cheers

Incidentally, YMMV means Your Milage May Vary.

Which part of my post are you ranting about when you said :

Besides, if someone isn't open to discussion, and willing to accept that they are human too and that they can err too and that their perceptions might be wrong, and that their observations will be subjected to interrogation/inspection/analysis, they shouldn't go on a public forum posting their opinion.

And if your post is not in response to my post, to Which post on this thread is your post related to ?????

 

[mowgli80]

The post Ranjeet replied to is quoted in the reply, it was addressed to Nikhil's "Getting into why they shouldn't sound better is simply not even up for discussion" which he edited later.

 

[netant]

before this thread diverts towards psychosocial unstability? among music lover i demand closure of this thread :sos:








hyeah:

 

[ranjeetrain]

IndianEars, you may want to re-read the thread carefully.