Skip to main content
Topic: Is WAV a lossy audio format? (Read 7929 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Is WAV a lossy audio format?

Reply #25
You could compare wav with avi ! Because avi also is a container - the video can be uncompressed or divx or whatever you want! Also you can throw wav into the avi-container which may be pcm or mp3 or whatever you want!
Praise me rjamorim !

Is WAV a lossy audio format?

Reply #26
All wrong! 

Technically, there is no WAV container.  RIFF is the container type.  WAVE is the format field, and WAV is the extension. 

Is WAV a lossy audio format?

Reply #27
Quote
Actually, Monty himself wants people to say only Ogg instead of vorbis. If you search, you can find a very funny post where he explains why he wants people to only call his codecs "Ogg".

And then he wonders why corporate stiffs don't take Ogg OR Vorbis very seriously.  Way to complicate things further!!

Rjamorim, I did a search and couldn't find much.  Do you have a link for that?  Or have we gone off-topic enough?

Is WAV a lossy audio format?

Reply #28
Quote
Quote
I know for a fact that FLAC and APE definately sound better than mp3s

And how exactly do you know this? 

The HA predilection for finely splitting hairs is interesting sometimes.  Here's another approach:

Most people refer to shn, flac and ape as lossless because the original wav file can be completely reconstructed from any of those formats.  So you're rather confused if you think flac or ape is better than wav (in the way 99.99999% of people refer to wav).

If you are a live music collector/trader, you want wav, shn, flac or ape because
- lossy formats (such as mp3) aren't tradeable
- lossy formats become obsolete (as the sweet spot for bit rates change and the encoder technology changes)

It's not especially useful to refer to wav files as lossless or not, as they are the baseline against which the others are measured - cd audio.

However, if you wanted to really split hairs - and this would be a more interesting set of hairs to split, I'd say - cd audio is obviously a somewhat lossy encode of the original studio masters.  It's just we have all accepted that.  But that's not really a view that comes up in practice.

MP3 as a lossy format, I believe, removes some high frequency data and, at least in my opinion, occasionally muddles the bass and midrange. This is, of course, subjective, and that opinion must be considered "to my ears", "on my equipment", and the like.

Besides this, wow, thanks for all the replies. I didn't think my first post here would hit 2 posts let alone 2 pages. 

Anyway, the nature of the debate I had with my friend was whether wav could fully reproduce exactly what was on CD data as it's a digital -> digital conversion which, in theory would mean there is no need for loss. The debate started because I felt that wav was in fact, lossless (at least for my intentions), otherwise, there would've been no point for people to bother creating a lossless audio codec because data would already have been lost in the transfer from the CD.

On this same line of discussion then, what is the best method for ripping a wav to be as close, if not exactly, the same as the data on a CD? Would there be any noticeable difference if I went to Soundforge, ripped it to 16/44.1k files and had Soundforge resample and convert up to 24/48k or 24/192k? If not, is there something that actually rips to a wav at the 24/48k+ level?

Is WAV a lossy audio format?

Reply #29
Quote
On this same line of discussion then, what is the best method for ripping a wav to be as close, if not exactly, the same as the data on a CD? Would there be any noticeable difference if I went to Soundforge, ripped it to 16/44.1k files and had Soundforge resample and convert up to 24/48k or 24/192k? If not, is there something that actually rips to a wav at the 24/48k+ level?

There is always a potential to hear a difference at that level.  By increasing the number of bits as well as the sampling rate, you will ironically be performing a lossy conversion.

The best way to rip a wav exactly the same as the CD is to use a program like Exact Audio Copy.  The Wav output will essentially be the same as what's on the CD.  I say essentially because if your CD has errors, then EAC will attempt to compensate for them.

In fact EAC tries so hard to insure perfect wavs, it can do things that us non-obsessive people would find silly (like another thread on how someone didn't understand why their CD quality was 99.9% rather than 100%).

As for something ripping a wav to 24/48, I don't know if there is, because almost all CDs are encoded at 16/44.1.  Any attempt to rip a wave like that could potentially be worse than 16/44.1 and at best, will not sound better

Is WAV a lossy audio format?

Reply #30
You cannot rip a CD higher than 16/44.1.  Anything higher is just resampling, and losing quality (though likely undetectably).

Is WAV a lossy audio format?

Reply #31
Quote
>but it doesnt offer the sorted icons that mp3 ext does. which is a nice visual. or has that changed?

It does not do icons for bitrates, but there is nothing to stop you using both programs together (obviously only one would supply the popup, which ever was installed last).

True, but i dont want a whole big list of shell ext's.
The reason's i had stopped using your very good product was at the time, then some 3 years back. it did not work well with Large fonts, and i was not able to include my own preferred ogg Serial number scheme.
which then, it was important to serialize all of them in a set manner based on certain rules. and dBpowerAMP had no option for changing the serial #
( might have changed now ? - i have used it in some time)

I have set my younger brother up with dBpowerAMP, and he uses it alot of the times now to convert his oggs.

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2019