Hi all-
Forgive what is a relatively newbie question but is there any point in terms of sound quality converting an mp3 file into a lossless format for cd burning? In other words, once you've made the conversion to mp3, you've already compromised the sound quality which will no longer be restored by converting to lossless?
Thanks for any advice!
Nothing can restore actual lost data, as far as I know. No, there's no real point to converting lossy to lossless except for bragging that you filled up your portable player to the brim
NO!
In other words, once you've made the conversion to mp3, you've already compromised the sound quality which will no longer be restored by converting to lossless?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=267986"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Correct.
Figured it was a silly question but thanks for the input!
Correct that the conversion won't restore any extra quality, but you did say for burning to CD, so I will say that burning programs like Burn at Once will uncompress all the input files ahead of time rather than try to decode during the burn.
Hi all-
Forgive what is a relatively newbie question but is there any point in terms of sound quality converting an mp3 file into a lossless format for cd burning? In other words, once you've made the conversion to mp3, you've already compromised the sound quality which will no longer be restored by converting to lossless?
Thanks for any advice!
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=267986"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No, the lossless file will just be a perfect recording of the imperfect MP3 file.
It will sound exactly the same as the MP3.
Like everyone else has said, you have already loss all the quality so converting it to loseless is pretty pointless. As DonP said, I like burnatonce to make my audio CD's because I can make them directly from my FLACs and OGGs.
Like everyone else has said, you have already loss all the quality so converting it to loseless is pretty pointless. As DonP said, I like burnatonce to make my audio CD's because I can make them directly from my FLACs and OGGs.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=269527"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Is there any way of downloading lossless files without them being giant? I find that by the time you've payed for all of the megabytes you're getting into the price range of just buying the actual cd
None whatsoever
None whatsoever
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=269804"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well if you can find FLAC files...they would be smaller than WAV files.
I ripped a song from a cd in mp3 format (160k) and in FLAC lvl8, and then transcoded the mp3 to FLAC, and the result was:
original flac rip: 18,366 KB
transcoded mp3: 19,044 KB
and when i monitor the file playing in winamp, you would think that flac would have detected the lower quality mp3 copy and encoded at a low bitrate, but there’s hardly a noticeable difference in bitrate when compared (which was obvious with the file size comparisons) but still. I wonder why this is?
I ripped a song from a cd in mp3 format (160k) and in FLAC lvl8, and then transcoded the mp3 to FLAC, and the result was:
original flac rip: 18,366 KB
transcoded mp3: 19,044 KB
and when i monitor the file playing in winamp, you would think that flac would have detected the lower quality mp3 copy and encoded at a low bitrate, but there’s hardly a noticeable difference in bitrate when compared (which was obvious with the file size comparisons) but still. I wonder why this is?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=282788"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It may be the same reason as the one why re-encoding lossy->lossy=bad: Lossy encoders introduce quatitization-noise(also called artifacts) - thus, it can happen that the encoded mp3 is more complex than the original. Or in more simple less technical-accurate words: If you do original->lossy->lossless, then the lossless-encoder also has to encode the artifacts.
This is just a guess - i dont know if the above is true.
- Lyx
you would think that flac would have detected the lower quality mp3 copy and encoded at a low bitrate, but there’s hardly a noticeable difference in bitrate when compared (which was obvious with the file size comparisons) but still. I wonder why this is?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=282788"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Lossy and lossless codecs differ fundamentally in how they encode audio (lossless is not just lossy with a larger bitrate); thus it is not possible for FLAC (or any lossless codec) to
detect the lower quality copy, it just does what it's supposed to: (as Lyx pointed out) it makes a perfect copy of the (now lower-quality) audio input.