What makes no sense to me at all though, is how a file (at level 8 setting) can lose almost 500 kbps of data and still be considered "lossless".
Maybe because I didn't fully understand how it worked which was made very clear in my first post. I have been using it THINKING I understood it. Thanks for the "warm" response btw, I really appreciate it.
So, based on these results, here is what is bothering me. Between the uncompressed setting and the level 8 setting, there is a loss of almost 500 kbps of data. In my mind, that is quite a substantial amount. I totally understand that whatever setting you chose will ultimately affect the end result bitrate of the file. I get that. What makes no sense to me at all though, is how a file (at level 8 setting) can lose almost 500 kbps of data and still be considered "lossless".Oh and btw.... Merry Christmas!
The compression ratio is a source of misunderstanding.A lot of people thing that it works like the bitrates in MP3 so more or less loss.
FLAC stands for Free Lossless Audio Codec, an audio format similar to MP3, but lossless, meaning that audio is compressed in FLAC without any loss in quality. This is similar to how Zip works, except with FLAC you will get much better compression because it is designed specifically for audio
I love you=a, =bababa.That's 24 characters = 24 bytes.
Try thinking of a steel coil spring held between the palms of your outstretched hands - you can make it shorter by squeezing harder, but the more you compress it, the higher the price you pay in terms of effort you have to put in. However, regardless of how much or how little you squeeze it, the substance of the spring remains exactly the same, and in each case it will return to exactly the same state when it's released.
I wasn’t intending to be rude. I had to ask because I honestly don’t understand what you thought FLAC was doing for you if not reducing the size of your tracks (compression) whilst preserving the audio exactly (lossless), and why you used it when you were unaware of its purpose in this way.
I just don't understand how you can be losing this much data and still have the resulting file be considered lossless.
Quote from: Speckmade on 26 December, 2011, 12:04:22 AMQuote from: psycho on 25 December, 2011, 05:20:27 PMababa...isn't actually used...That is a simple form of entropy coding, which is used in FLAC.
Quote from: psycho on 25 December, 2011, 05:20:27 PMababa...isn't actually used...
no appropriate rice code for very low volume signals