Skip to main content

Topic: Level 5 to uncompressed (Read 3811 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • PDCanham
  • [*]
Level 5 to uncompressed
I want my files in uncompressed flac as space is not an issue.
Could someone in simple terms tell me do i have to decode level 5 flacs to wav?
or can i convert  from level 5 to uncompressed flac without converting to wav first?
Any help would be greatful :D
  • Last Edit: 31 October, 2017, 11:15:38 AM by Peter

  • eahm
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #1
YOU CAN DO BOTH BUT WHY?  :))

Please no CAPS, no bold.

Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #2
Really?  I just use level 8.  What's the point of uncompressed FLAC?  Space isn't issue for me, either but come on?

  • PDCanham
  • [*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #3
i just wanted to know as i archive it in wav . and use flac i want to archive in uncompressed flac without lossing tags
  • Last Edit: 14 October, 2017, 02:56:14 AM by PDCanham

  • PDCanham
  • [*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #4
YOU CAN DO BOTH BUT WHY?  :))

Please no CAPS, no bold.
i just wanted to know as i archive it in wav . and use flac i want to archive in uncompressed flac without lossing tags

  • PDCanham
  • [*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #5
Also I have some Apple lossless I guess this is the same principle?

Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #6
Also I have some Apple lossless I guess this is the same principle?

Apple lossless is compressed with no setting to adjust the level of compression, basically lossless compression for idiots.  The tag formats between Apple Lossless and FLAC are incompatible but proper mapping is not hard to do.
  • Last Edit: 14 October, 2017, 03:30:12 AM by Chibisteven

  • lvqcl
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #7
YOU CAN DO BOTH BUT WHY?
i just wanted to know as i archive it in wav . and use flac i want to archive in uncompressed flac without lossing tags
You didn't answer why you want to use "uncompressed" flac instead of compressed.

  • PDCanham
  • [*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #8
I doesn't matter why. if i want to use it i will. but thank you for the answers

  • eahm
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #9
Any audio software that's able to convert will convert your FLAC files to WAV and will be able to transfer the tags, foobar2000 has an integrated converter as well or you can use a standalone converter.

In foobar2000 just right click the files, Convert, ..., then select your options.

  • PDCanham
  • [*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #10
Ok thank you  :D  ;D  :)

  • pdq
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #11
I doesn't matter why. if i want to use it i will. but thank you for the answers
This may be due to some misconception on your part, and we would be happy to give you the correct information, but we can't do that until you tell us why you are doing something that doesn't seem to make sense.

  • PDCanham
  • [*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #12
the question I was asking out of curiosity was  like an mp3 you cannot change that to say flac it's a wast of time.
I am not an expert and I find the simplistic answers the best for my ears.
I basically wanted to know that a level 5 compression of flac as i have a few level 5 compressions you would not loose anything by converting it to back uncompressed flac?it is basically the same as wav or any level of flac.   I keep wav files as a back up that is just me but sometimes have lost the tag data. i could save as uncompressed flac the data on the tag is safe and as an archive it would be a better way of storing it. it is up to me what compression level i have. some one says they like 8 some like 5 i happen to like uncompressed.

Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #13
the question I was asking out of curiosity was  like an mp3 you cannot change that to say flac it's a wast of time....

You can, but, as you say, it is a waste of time: there is no point.

Of course, you can do whatever you want with your own data, including music. Just asking... if you are confusing lossy compression, which can never be restored to the original data with lossless compression, which can always be restored to the original data, regardless of the level of compression.

Just asking. Not trying to force anything on you. Once upon a time, people insisted on keeping their music as WAV files. Once upon a time, I did too.

The most important audio cables are the ones in the brain

  • PDCanham
  • [*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #14
I know and thank you for your answers.you have answered my question.
I don't go to far into the lossless thing as sometimes I think people can get lost in the details and forget the music..
And who know maybe one-day I will archive at level 8.  :)
thank you

Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #15
And who know maybe one-day I will archive at level 8.  :)
thank you
Still, the bottom line here is: all most of these replies were trying to tip you off that you'd definitely benefit immensely from educating yourself on what lossless compression actually is/does.

You don' even have to go far into it; a simple but careful read at this concise summary ("What is FLAC?") will make you go a long way.

Only then, you'd be able to look back at this last statement of yours quoted above, and realise how daft it sounds, as you insist upon the same  misconceptions. For instance, a search for many similar threads over here can show you why .WAV archival is a no-no and uncompressed FLAC will probably only make you wonder why you ever did it, later on.
  • Last Edit: 15 October, 2017, 08:19:55 AM by includemeout
Listen to the music, not the media.

  • PDCanham
  • [*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #16
Well thank you for the lesson, on flac i have learnt a lot I found this interesting
https://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread.php?tid=18382
  • Last Edit: 15 October, 2017, 11:23:09 AM by PDCanham

  • lithopsian
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #17
Well thank you for the lesson, on flac i have learnt a lot I found this interesting
https://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread.php?tid=18382
And now we know why you're confused.

  • PDCanham
  • [*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #18
you tell me what i am confuzzed about i am a beginna i admit but i got the gist of flac that it's similar to a zip file.

  • PDCanham
  • [*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #19
I did say thank you for the lesson  :)  :) and this is what i have learnt

FLAC is *always* lossless. The encoding level simply sets how hard the encoder works to save bytes. The default is I think 5 or 6 usually, and is optimal for almost all tasks. Settings it very high (e.g. 8) will increase the encoding times for very minimal games (<1% typically). Conversely, very low settings will result in files 2-5% larger but faster encodes. That said, a middle number is super fast on today's monster CPUs so there is really no reason to go lower (or higher) than 5-6. ::)  ::)  ::)  ;D

  • Fairy
  • [*][*][*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #20
Archiving in wav? That is also a nice way to give "bit rot" a free pass to your sound data without noticing it at first.
Flac uses checksums to ensure data is OK, and it has tagging and embedding functionality. It also mutes when a bad block is fed into the decoder.
Throwing that away without any gain, even giving up space for really no reason whatsoever.

Flac compression-decompression is many times faster than realtime, even on very slow pc's. With a slow harddrive you can even GAIN speed when using compression.

I would settle for nothing other than Flac -8 when using a computer that is younger than 15 years old :)

About: https://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread.php?tid=18382

That is just utter bullshit. There is NO audible difference between FLAC -8 and Uncompressed because exactly the same data is fed to the soundcard.
If there is, you have a really bad computer where calculations by the CPU and traffic through the North- and Southbridge are audible. Then Uncompressed VS FLAC is the last thing you should worry about. Or a very shitty implementation of FLAC, but I cannot mention any, maybe because they do not yet exist.
A computer (even a dedicated one) is litterally doing millions of things at the time you play music. Adding FLAC decoding will not make a difference. If it does, toss away that player, because it's junk! If that Linn player on that forum has audible artifacts during flac playback it's a player fault, not the file format.
People claiming audible difference because the computer has to decode the file have no clue about how a computer works. Data is fed into a large buffer (uncompressed). This is the same for wav as for FLAC, because the signal from wav also has to pass through the software that controls the sound card. Timing errors, jitter etc. plain nonsense.

Sorry for the language. I hate it when people without knowledge (not the TopicStarter, but that site) claim things that are just really not true.
I have even heard people saying that music from a SSD sounded more analytical and from a HDD it was more analog, and even the price of the SATA cables did matter. Gimme a break!

PS. FLAC is always lossless. Not to make things more complicated, but there does exist a way to losslessly archive into FLAC, that is lossywav as a preprocessor, but the FLAC part is always lossless. If you put a MP3 into the FLAC encoder it will create a lossless FLAC file, but the MP3 already has a lot removed so it does not make sense. It's the same as saving a JPG to 10% quality, creating a small file and then convert it to PNG. The PNG could theoretically be as big or even bigger than the original, but all the details in the original photo is gone forever.
  • Last Edit: 16 October, 2017, 06:15:12 AM by Fairy

Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #21
... i got the gist of flac that it's similar to a zip file.

Stick with that. You don't really need to know any more about it ...and neither do I!

The following is metaphorical, not technical:

-- It is shorter to write 1-9 than 123456789
-- it is shorter to write seven 100s than 100100100100100100100

It is easy to understand that one way that data-compression programs work is to look for patterns that repeat and express them in a way that takes less bits than the original. At this point, so far as my brain is concerned, I can see that the principle of the thing is very simple, but the practice is going to be very complex indeed.  Speaking as a retired systems manager of the learned-hands-on kind, rather than of  degree-in-computer-science kind, so long as I was aware of practicality and reliability issues, I didn't need to further down that path of understanding.

And speaking as a music listener, I don't either. In fact, why don't I just admit that I don't even know what levels of compression my FLAC files have, and nor do I care. My computer is about seven years old, but I don't believe that it cares either.

No, it's not like MP3. I care about that bit rate. Probably more than, objectively, I should  :-[
The most important audio cables are the ones in the brain

  • saratoga
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #22
Well thank you for the lesson, on flac i have learnt a lot I found this interesting
https://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread.php?tid=18382

Damn that guy is stupid.

  • lithopsian
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #23
Well thank you for the lesson, on flac i have learnt a lot I found this interesting
https://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread.php?tid=18382

Damn that guy is stupid.

Plenty of support on the thread, so not just one guy, although there was kickback too.

  • bennetng
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: LEVEL 5 TO UNCOMPRESSED
Reply #24
http://archimago.blogspot.hk/2013/05/measurements-do-lossless-compressed.html

I think the linn thread is talking about the differences of analog output. Ironically the highly CPU consuming APE has the most consistent and highest "correlated null depth", at least in Archimago's system.