Last post by Deathcrow -
FLAC is lossless. The compression level just affects the CPU required for encoding/decoding and resulting filesize. There's no difference in quality. Personally I always use compression level 8.
(though I can't speak to human error when needlessly reconverting FLAC files multiple times. A low level of understanding can lead to mistakes)
Last post by Amarok -
I ripped my entire CD collection with DBPoweramp to FLAC using a compression level of -5. Subsequently I used DBPoweramp to convert the files to uncompressed. Now I am running out of space again and I am considering re-converting my library of FLAC files to a compression level of -5. However, I am reluctant to do so in case there is any detrimental effect on the files. Does anyone know if there are any issues related to encoding and re-encoding FLAC files more than once?
Last post by PopandilaRO -
When I double click a song from an album in the EsPlaylist viewer, I want to add all the songs that are in that album in a playlist, and when I double click a song from another album, it deletes the songs from the previous album from the playlist and adds the songs from the current/new album. How do i do that?
Last post by Case -
Could it be you got confused about what order is mixed? To support the new folder-based tagging I call foobar's sort function to sort selection by path so that consecutive tracks will use the same folder.tags file for maximum speed. With image+cue that will alter the metadata order it shows in properties but it doesn't affect the actual order in playlist.
Last post by Deathcrow -
Well there's an argument to be made that radio is on the way out and most digital services employ some form of replaygain. So there's definitely a lot less incentive to brick-wall recordings.
I haven't seen a lot of evidence though that victims of the loudness war are actually rolling back their loudness.
Last post by KozmoNaut -
It's more a case of the tools being so good now, and engineers having more experience. They can absolutely slam the hell out of a track, while avoiding many of the worst effects of over-compression, namely the 'pumping' effect and overcrowding. Sidechain compression is probably the biggest factor here. Whole genres such as Dubstep and EDM probably wouldn't exist if it wasn't possible to slam the everliving daylights out of tracks, while still keeping a moderately listenable result.
So yes, the "slam everything to 11" approach won, in the general sense. But it's less annoying than it used to be.
I don't know if it's just my taste evolving over time, or a reaction to the loudness war, but over the last 5-10 years, I've gotten a lot more into noisier music, such as blackened thrash metal with low production values. It's meant to be noisy and abrasive and in your face, so it works well in the context of modern production, unlike music that needs/deserves high-quality less aggressive production. On the other hand, I have also discovered a number of prog rock/metal bands that really thrive on good production, but it's certainly a niche thing.
I do wish everyone would go back to mastering for -20dBFS average and let the peaks fall naturally in that headroom, maybe with just a bit of tasteful compression on drums etc.