Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Readme, pls; Sourceforge page last updated in 2008 (Read 4275 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Readme, pls; Sourceforge page last updated in 2008

Quote from: oct714 on
I am aware that probably what I am in need for is already posted somewhere in this forum, but I have checked and I cannot find an exact answer to what I am looking for.

Ditto, can some1 pls tell me what's up with FLAC?? Has the development ceased (last page edit in 2008)?! Is there an alternative?.. Idk if I've ever used it in the past, but need it now pretty badly. What should I do, use it, look for something else??

ps.
Isn't it true that there's nothing better than FLAC?!??
Z68A-G43*i7-3770*Ven. 2x4GB 2133MHz*WD 1TB 64MB SATA*Win7 Pro/64

Readme, pls; Sourceforge page last updated in 2008

Reply #1 –
Quote from: nimd4 on
Quote from: oct714 on
I am aware that probably what I am in need for is already posted somewhere in this forum, but I have checked and I cannot find an exact answer to what I am looking for.

Ditto, can some1 pls tell me what's up with FLAC?? Has the development ceased (last page edit in 2008)?! Is there an alternative?.. Idk if I've ever used it in the past, but need it now pretty badly. What should I do, use it, look for something else??


FLAC is not dead, it is simply mature and doesn't need updates. It could use some and there are alternative encoders / decoders, but it's only about speed and to slight extent strength, not a big deal.

Quote from: nimd4 on
ps.
Isn't it true that there's nothing better than FLAC?!??

It's a highly subjective matter. For some FLAC is the king, for others it's long out of competition.
Read:
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?ti...less_comparison

Readme, pls; Sourceforge page last updated in 2008

Reply #2 –
Awesome, tyvm.
Z68A-G43*i7-3770*Ven. 2x4GB 2133MHz*WD 1TB 64MB SATA*Win7 Pro/64

Readme, pls; Sourceforge page last updated in 2008

Reply #3 –
After following the link to the post you quoted, I must ask what relevance it has to this topic, besides saving you from having to type your own version of the “I tried searching, but…” disclaimer.

Quote
What should I do, use it, look for something else??
That depends on which applications/devices you wish to use your lossless files on. If they only support FLAC and/or you’re not worried about using something that hasn’t been updated in a while (which plenty of other people have no problem with), then go ahead and use it.

Quote
Isn't it true that there's nothing better than FLAC?!??
That depends on what you mean by “better”. There are plenty of other lossless codecs—from those by leading companies (e.g. Apple’s ALAC, Microsoft’s WMAL); to those by individual developers and with limited audience (e.g. WavPack, TAK); to those with oft-unrivalled compression but little to no support (e.g. LA). You have to evaluate your situation to determine which trade-offs you are willing to accept between compatibility, features, support, development cycle, etc.

Readme, pls; Sourceforge page last updated in 2008

Reply #4 –
Quote from: dv1989 on
After following the link to the post you quoted, I must ask what relevance it has to this topic, besides saving you from having to type your own version of the “I tried searching, but…” disclaimer.

Yeah, s0z.  Thanks for the reply, also I took a good look @ the Wiki (nice link, page ).  Could you guys tell me what frontend to use w/FLAC on Windblow$?  I mean which 1 are you using.. I'm most interested in setting the maximum, maximum quality (care less about the rest).

ps.
Just btw., there's a neat-lookin' thing, Windows X's Fidelizer @
Code: [Select]
http://windowsxlive.net/fidelizer-instantly-computer-audiophile-workstation

.. but no clue as 2 what it does, exactly. ;D
Z68A-G43*i7-3770*Ven. 2x4GB 2133MHz*WD 1TB 64MB SATA*Win7 Pro/64

Readme, pls; Sourceforge page last updated in 2008

Reply #5 –
Quote from: nimd4 on
Could you guys tell me what frontend to use w/FLAC on Windblow$?  I mean which 1 are you using.. I'm most interested in setting the maximum, maximum quality (care less about the rest).
I’m certain that all of us here never tire of explaining the simple and should-be-self-evident fact that there are no variable degrees of quality in the context of lossless audio! It’s not as though there’s any clue in the name or anything like that.

Quote
ps.
Just btw., there's a neat-lookin' thing, Windows X's Fidelizer @
Code: [Select]
http://windowsxlive.net/fidelizer-instantly-computer-audiophile-workstation

.. but no clue as 2 what it does, exactly. ;D
Looks like complete nonsense to me, implying that one can obtain superior quality using any of a specific group of “sophisticated audio player” but only after applying tweaks whose purpose is apparently known less by Microsoft than by someone with almost no grasp of either digital audio technology or language itself (dual-purpose example: “It's something that can turn your odinary Windows to amazing computer that makes music sound a lot better and it doesn't mess up your Windows after restart. If you love good music and know what WASAPI is good for, you can't miss to try this.”)

Readme, pls; Sourceforge page last updated in 2008

Reply #6 –
0k I can see that you're either in a belligerent, or a busy mood.  The frontend (the 1 which I haven't gotten yet), FLAC, have no settings pertaining to quality whatsoever? o.0 Guess I'll give it a whirl, thanks for the reply.
Z68A-G43*i7-3770*Ven. 2x4GB 2133MHz*WD 1TB 64MB SATA*Win7 Pro/64

Readme, pls; Sourceforge page last updated in 2008

Reply #7 –
Quote from: nimd4 on
0k I can see that you're either in a belligerent, or a busy mood.  The frontend (the 1 which I haven't gotten yet), FLAC, have no settings pertaining to quality whatsoever? o.0 Guess I'll give it a whirl, thanks for the reply.

Think about is as of a zip. Does zip have quality settings? No, only speed vs. strength ones, it always preserves what you put inside (unless it's buggy). That's how lossless audio works, it's like zip, just specialized.

And the quote brought by dv1989 does sound like a bunch of marketing lies.
 

Readme, pls; Sourceforge page last updated in 2008

Reply #8 –
Quote from: nimd4 on
0k I can see that you're either in a belligerent, or a busy mood.
Belligerence doesn't come into it; I just wonder how people who come to use lossless audio compression can avoid being aware that its entire purpose is to preserve the input audio signal exactly, with no loss, a function it is named after! Quality doesn't come into it because lossless compression preserves the input signal bit-for-bit.

Quote
The frontend (the 1 which I haven't gotten yet), FLAC, have no settings pertaining to quality whatsoever?
Is this a question? I would expect a frontend to allow setting of compression level, but this has nothing to do with quality because it only affects the level of time (computational power) spent by the encoder (i.e. audio can be compressed to a smaller size if more time is alloted).

Quote from: _m²_ on
And the quote brought by dv1989 does sound like a bunch of marketing lies.
Thankfully, there doesn't appear to be a charge for the program; so, people are only wasting their time, not their money!