Flac and audio

>flac compression above 10

what

ffmpeg -i input.wav -c:a flac -compression_level output.flac
0 ... fastest compression speed, least compression
12 ... slowest compression speed, best compression

for consumer music there is no reason to flac, because the audio quality between flac and opus is indistinguishable

Just pirate your stuff or buy it from a normal shop.

>thread about flac, a lossless compression format
>starts shitting it up with talk about lossy compression format
nobody want you here.

do it. FLAC is a meme. I work in audio engineering and my dad is the ceo of xbox, if you have the extra disposable storage space for sure

>keep that digital signal pure maaan

Attached: 9962E966-E9AA-405F-A87D-93B2A72AEA87.jpg (683x1024, 93K)

>reee leave my placebo safespace!!1
>downvote downvote report downvote

Attached: 8B74E9A3-CCE5-4087-85D9-F84E43F2DFC1.png (753x960, 29K)

not him, but OPUS is pretty schway
I primarily use FLAC for stuff that have data encoded in the audio, but not for music itself
I'd get too much other bottleneck like my audio gear, and like, the obvious, HUMAN EARS. that it doesn't make any difference if applied properly

Attached: -mustarded-351956.jpg (610x646, 400K)

I use it on my phone too.

>frequencies only matter for my ears and nothing else

>>frequencies only matter for my ears and nothing else
sure, twist it
or maybe read the middle line.

looks like someone hasn't ascended to the higher planes before

>higher planes
Enlighten me, please.

Yeah, it's needlessly large.

>not using an obviously superior lossless format.
Kek

Attached: 1553201144006.jpg (600x338, 20K)

Okay. But you'll probably not read it due to its length and how bright it glows, or tell me to myself because we are discussing technology not necessarily related to the thread and too high intellect for the average Jow Forums user.

cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001700210016-5.pdf

>tl;dr
>manipulation of frequencies around you and inside you may be used as a method of reaching a higher "existence" where if successful transfers occur, it could be a massive benefit to your limited knowledge and skills here.

Attached: C20C5762-82FC-4639-8D58-7E0FF43D7B23.jpg (836x543, 158K)

Maybe low storage capacity if using uncompressed flac, but who the fuck does that? Compress that shit niggy it's fucking lossless.

there is no point in using anything else than flac, period. it offers the best size compression out of all the lossless audio codecs, and if you were to sell files with it, you wouldn't have to pay royalities unlinke with, for example, DTS-HD Master Audio.

Flac isn't placebo for storage purposes desu. It does its job of being free, lossless and an audio codec

foss fags have to over complicate everything. instead of offering the default compression range (0-8) they had to go the extra mile and make it 0-12. ffmpeg is the worst offender when it comes to that. they often rename thinks for no other reason than to change things. vp9 for example, used to have -speed and -quality which they retardedly renamed to -cpu-used and -deadline

who are you quoting?

Because I don't have a dedicated sound card and cheap headphones. I doesn't make any difference. All it's fucking wasted space on my hard drive.

Oh, don't worry. I am not gonna bash you.
But I do have several points...
I can get behind the goals of a project like that, generally because the brain already has several frequency states (or as well known as neural oscillation) and I wouldn't be amazed if sensory input that introduces a other osculation can affect the brain in a way, a bit like mixing different frequencies with a modular synth.
I am not gonna prove that paper wrong, since there has undoubtedly been a correlation between osculating input and awareness.
And debating that isn't my goal.

But coming back to the subject of FLAC as a audio format, if this is a argument to implement flac. Why not just synthesize the frequencies on the spot?
I feel like this could be a job for a standalone program that would be in size a lot smaller than the actual saved audio if it were saved. Taking, that we are talking about relatively simple modulations (let's be real, most of that material used for the osculating input is relatively simple talking in waveforms/data)

Another point of debate could be that the algorithms in certain lossy compression methods are able to basically modulate that function for the recorded osculation on the fly from the data provided in the actual file.
(It's worth mentioning that MP3 isn't something that does this very cleanly, but we've came a long way with other codecs)

It's also worth discussing the source of that material you listen to, I assume you aren't the person does youtube-dl -x --audio-format flac, right?
But also sources like CD quality is mostly compressed somewhere in the production, which is the industrial standard.
And it's very hard unless you are taking directly on the spot modulated functions and comparing that on a spectrogram for minuscule high pitch drop offs (which is mostly inaudible to the ear)

My point is not to bash you, but just offer a place for lossy codecs and methodes on where they could be applicable.

the different codecs are rather interesting if you look into them, imo

Waste of space.
I can't tell de diference between V0 and FLAC.

Sad!

Attached: 6BE0060B-018B-4C4B-86F7-4B8298AF05BA.jpg (618x594, 35K)

Waste of space.
I can't tell the difference between ALAC and FLAC.

High bitrate mp3's have no audible difference with lossless formats. Change my mind.

Attached: 1552937403875.gif (498x498, 3.24M)

Anyone who advocates for lossy formats is literally advocating for regression
Everyone wants to say that CDs are dead and we are past them with digital music but if you use a lossy format then you are using a digital format that is actually worst than what a CD can do

>is there even a point to not using flac on a desktop or laptop?
Yes, if you're poor and don't have much space then opus makes a much more efficient use of limited space.

Can't, but if you want to encode to multiple bitrates/formats then you will want to keep a lossless version which is my case.

>think about compressing a wav file into a rar archive, uncompressing that file from archive when you want to listen to it
honestly its the best way to explain loseless

Sure, but basically any audio format is transparent if you're willing to throw enough bitrate at it. Why pick mp3?

youtu.be/UoBPNTAFZMo

FLAC takes a lot of space without a noticeable benefit.

All of my music is ogg because I don't care about this autistic shit.

>vp9 for example, used to have -speed and -quality which they retardedly renamed to -cpu-used and -deadline
a) You can still use -speed and -quality.
b) libvpx uses the terms cpu-used and deadline.

what kind of external dac or sound card should i get if i want to have a hardware-level equaliser that doesn't fuck with my software so i can EQ my headphones

You would just get an equalizer
They are never usually builtin to a soundcard or DAC in such a way where they don't depend on software
pic related is the Behringer MiniFBQ FBQ800

Attached: 51b4Q7mdOPL._SL1000_.jpg (1000x1000, 54K)

Literally more then half the file size for the same quality.

Maybe if you have a pentium III processor or a 20Gib drive, a format requiring less cpu overhead or drive space might be more up you're alley.

Attached: 1339550542660.jpg (500x583, 43K)

Even after YouTube's compression there's a noticeable difference.

don't be retarded please

>have shity, wireless gamer headphones
>so shitty the power switch is actually broken and doesn't stay in place, causing one or both ears to go quiet
>could still easily tell the difference between mp3 and wav clips of Jay-Z on npr's test

Don't know

>there's a noticeable difference.
in your imagination. you hear what you want to hear.

youtube.com/watch?v=YgEjI5PZa78
losless music BTFO

>downloading lossy music
>downloading music
>not buying and ripping CDs, or even digitizing vinyl

Nope.

If anything that video proves that you can.

>buying and ripping CDs, or even digitizing vinyl
I only do this.

Okay, grandpa.

>have $20 headphones
>literally can't tell the difference between any of this
>can rip music from Youtube without a care in the world

Ignorance is bliss

Lol

youtu.be/UrfX-g8auc8
FLAC is for archiving not listening

Yeah if the album I'm downloading was only released in mp3 I'm not going to transcode like an autist

mp3 just werks.