somebody can really explain me this:
I do a test.
1. I have a original CD and I rip one song to WAV
2. I have the same song on FLAC download from the web... and convert to WAV
both are THE SAME!! pressings
I open the .wavs on adobe soundbooth and see the waveform, spectrum
I was think "ok both are the same, same size kb... so waveform will be the same"
BUT!!!!! surprise!
waveform are not!!!! the same
so its seem that yes!!! exist difference between rip to WAV and get a .flac and convert to WAV
so why people say "lossless is lossless" bla bla, if it the same why are different spectrum and waveform etc...???
the wav is better? or what happend here, see your self the diference is evident
wav from original CD
(http://i.imgur.com/ntjGu.png)
wav from the flac
(http://i.imgur.com/yq5LJ.png)
please help
The FLAC you downloaded was just different. It wasn't ripped from the exact same CD as yours, and/or with the same settings.
Convert the WAV you ripped to FLAC, then convert the FLAC back to WAV. Compare it to the WAV that you ripped. They will be bit-for-bit identical.
somebody can really explain me this:
I do a test.
1. I have a original CD and I rip one song to WAV
2. I have the same song on FLAC download from the web... and convert to WAV
both are THE SAME!! pressings
But they have not the same WAV source file and those different WAV sources can easily contain, for a number of reasons (*), different contents.
The only consistent test is WAV_1 -> [FLAC] -> WAV_2.
Rest assured that WAV_1 = WAV_2. (otherwise the FLAC en/decoder is flawed!)
(*) one of them could be not accurately ripped or there could be a watermark in the downloaded one, just to number a few...
This thread makes logic sad.
Edit: I should elaborate: It seems quite evident that the only reliable way to test a conjecture like this is for you to rip a track to a WAV file, convert that same file to FLAC and (optionally) back to WAV, and then compare the results; you’ll find the same identity between the two as everyone else does. It’s great that you’re being informed about the potential pitfalls of CD ripping in response, but the original reasoning doesn’t work at all.
If the discs are from the same pressing, and if both rips are accurate, the difference is probably due to the different reading offsets.
Check http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/en/index.php/...fset-questions/ (http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/en/index.php/support/faq/offset-questions/) for an explanation.
You can use EAC's wav compare feature to check if just the offsets are to blame, or if there are other difference between the files.
both are THE SAME!! pressings
the premise is wrong.
so its seem that yes!!! exist difference between rip to WAV and get a .flac and convert to WAV
the wav is better? or what happend here, see your self the diference is evident
so your conclusion is wrong.
fyi, many labels have their releases remastered before making them available in online music stores. the fact that a online music store release has the same release date, same catalog no., same tracklisting, etc., as the CD release is not sufficient to conclude that both releases are, in fact, identical.
Ripping errors on your end or the uploader can also account for the differences. Or the uploader may have even sourced the FLACs from a lossy source.
Here's how I compare two wav from different source (and if it's flac, uncompress first to wav):
I use the software "beyond compare" that allows to compare files (usually text, but works also for binary comparison).
If a big main chunk of data is exactly same, then there's just an offset of difference between files, and most likely the data is "good".