![]() ![]() ![]() If you save a picture to JPG, some detail in the picture is lost for good, for ever, it can't be brought back. PNG has no quality percentage, it doesn't remove detail in the image, it only lets you trade compression speed for less disk space used (higher compression ratio means less disk space but more time to save the picture to disk). JPG removes detail from the picture to squeeze everything in an amount of disk space (you configure the percentage of quality when saving to JPG). JPG is lossy and not so open source (but old enough that you don't have to pay licensing fees to use it). PNG is just like FLAC, lossless and free, open source. If you want better, you'd have to order the FLAC or Apple Lossless (ALAC) or AIFF or DSD files and convert them to FLAC.Ĭonversion between lossless audio formats won't degrade quality at all, the new file will be identical to the original one, except maybe for convertion from DSD to anything else, because DSD stores audio information in a different way than the normal way audio files store audio information, so a conversion step has to be performed which may cause 0.00001% loss of quality or something like that. MP3 files properly compressed (by studios, or from CD) with bitrates around 224-256 kbps VBR to 320kbps CBR can be fairly transparent, if you don't have quality and relatively expensive speakers, it's unlikely you'd notice significant differences. Nowadays, mp3 is fairly well supported by almost everything. ![]() In the past, some players didn't support MP3 because they didn't want to pay licensing fees for the mp3 patents, but since FLAC is open source there's no fees to be paid, so they supported FLAC. ![]() Pretty much the only reason you'd convert a lossy audio file to FLAC would be if the lossy audio file is compressed with something that's not supported by your playback device (TV, portable audio player etc). If you only have MP3 files, some audio information was already removed by the encoder and can't really be recreated, so converting to FLAC won't add quality to the file, you'll just end up with a bigger file. MP3 is a lossy format, which means when the audio file is created, the encoder looks at the sound and determines what stuff can be carefully removed without your ears noticing a lot of difference.įLAC is lossless, which means it doesn't remove any audio detail from audio tracks. Yeah, basically what everyone here said is correct. Let me know down below on what you think. I have already converted about 11 songs into FLAC wich i brought from google play music, but i did a copy of that music and converted the copy to flac while keeping the original mp3 file. īut my argument is that what if you have nothing else than mp3.? I already own a couple of albums but they are all in mp3 files, and i dont want to fork the extra cash just becasue i can listen it in '' true flac '' format. I mean sure i did some reading and people generally said that its useless and the quality does not change at all and then they proceed to link me a wiki article like this. I am slowly starting to get into the world of lossless audio ( btw, i will soon post a question about daps and hi res in ear monitors, did some digging and the fiio m3 looks like a good starting point for me )Īnd so far its been great but i would like to ask that is it worth converting your mp3 files into FLAC ?! ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |