Question about FLAC-ing using dbPoweramp

[Benedict_Arnold]

Not really worried about disc space for home, because hard discs are huge these days and $100 buys me 4 terabytes of storage, a RAID10 housing costs me $150.

All my CDs are ripped to FLACs, however, for the car and my Fiio X3 which has a measly 128 gigabyte SD card limit.

dbPoweramp gives me eight levels of FLAC to choose from.

Which gives the best playback and which gives the most compression?

Now, if I rip them all again (I'm still on the dole so it's not like I've got much better to do), should I continue to rip them as FLACs or in some other format for the best possible playback?

Remember they're all those antiquarian compact disc things your grandfather told you about, no the latest 256 bit, 400 gigahertz stuff you young whippersnappers like so much...

Now, where are my pipe and slippers? Val Doonican's on UK Gold soon...

 

[andyjm]

dbPoweramp gives me eight levels of FLAC to choose from.

Which gives the best playback and which gives the most compression?

Now, if I rip them all again (I'm still on the dole so it's not like I've got much better to do), should I continue to rip them as FLACs or in some other format for the best possible playback?

The 'LAC' in FLAC is 'lossless audio compression'. It makes no difference what level of compression you use as on playback the data is the same - the system is lossless.

The point of the compression setting was a tradeoff between the level of compression achieved (the amount of filespace saved) and the processing time taken to do it. Setting 8 gives the smallest files, but takes the longest to do it. Level 1 gives the bigest files, but is quicker. They both result in exactly the same data and quality of playback when the file is decoded.

These days with multi core high speed processors, the time taken is much less of an issue. I just leave it on the default setting (which I think is 5?).

 

[TomSawyer]

I also just leave it on 5. You can rip many different formats simultaneously which then have identical metadata so I rip a FLAC for best and a 256k MP3 of each for the car.

 

[Benedict_Arnold]

Thanks guys.

I'll stick to FLAC factor eight so I don't have to rip once for the car and again for the hi-fi.

 

[Benedict_Arnold]

Thanks guys.

I'll stick to FLAC factor eight so I don't have to rip once for the car and again for the hi-fi.

 

[arley]

Just to throw in another suggestion....

I rip to FLAC (at whatever level of compression) as my 'Master' which I use at home as my source for Sonos. But remember you can also use Audio Converters to change to whatever format you want to and as diskspace is so plentiful, I keep two copies of my tracks both as FLAC and MP3 so that I can have plentiful music 'on the go'. So my workflow is something like:

1. Rip CD to FLAC

2. Edit Metadata to make sure it's just right

3. Make MP3 version of the FLAC files

You can of course do this retrospectively for when you get bored of your 192K Bit rate files and then convert the whole lot to 320k.

FWIW I use 'Pro Audio Convertor' for the Mac and it works a charm....

 

[Benedict_Arnold]

I do t need MP3s as my Fiio plays FLACs just fine.

A 128 gig SD card holds over 100 albums (FLAC'd) so plenty for a fortnight offshore. It also plugs into my car stereo.

As for upconverting from 192k baud (there's a word you don't hear often these days) to 320k, what's the point? The "original" isn't going to change, after all, and any software is just going to be guessing about filling in the blanks.

 

[arley]

As for upconverting from 192k baud (there's a word you don't hear often these days) to 320k, what's the point? The "original" isn't going to change, after all, and any software is just going to be guessing about filling in the blanks.

Sorry, wasn't clear. I meant you can use the original FLAC files to upconvert so they _would_ be better quality. For the car, I'd have thought an MP3 would be fine if you're stuck for space?

 

[andyjm]

As for upconverting from 192k baud (there's a word you don't hear often these days) to 320k, what's the point?

One of the reasons you don't hear the word 'Baud' much these days is it is frequently misunderstood. As I am afraid it has been here.

 

[andyjm]

Thanks guys.

I'll stick to FLAC factor eight so I don't have to rip once for the car and again for the hi-fi.

The compression (filesize) difference between 5 and 8 isn't great. MP3 will give much smaller filesizes.

It was mentioned above, but just to repeat, dBpoweramp will let you rip to different formats at the same time. So I rip a CD once using dBpoweramp, but it produces two sets of files, one set FLAC and the other MP3. If you configure the software correctly, it puts the files in different folders automatically, so that you can build up a FLAC library for listening at home and an MP3 library for iDevices and cars etc.

All for no extra effort except setting the sytem up properly.

 

[TomSawyer]

The compression (filesize) difference between 5 and 8 isn't great. MP3 will give much smaller filesizes.

It was mentioned above, but just to repeat, dBpoweramp will let you rip to different formats at the same time. So I rip a CD once using dBpoweramp, but it produces two sets of files, one set FLAC and the other MP3. If you configure the software correctly, it puts the files in different folders automatically, so that you can build up a FLAC library for listening at home and an MP3 library for iDevices and cars etc.

All for no extra effort except setting the sytem up properly.

+1

Just to add:

- dBPoweramp allows the metadata to be checked/corrected before ripping so no need for an additional step as an earlier poster suggested; and

- there is a decent difference in file size between FLAC level 8 and high bitrate mp3 but I defy anyone to hear the difference in a car on the move.

 

[Benedict_Arnold]

As for upconverting from 192k baud (there's a word you don't hear often these days) to 320k, what's the point? The "original" isn't going to change, after all, and any software is just going to be guessing about filling in the blanks.

 

Sorry, wasn't clear. I meant you can use the original FLAC files to upconvert so they _would_ be better quality. For the car, I'd have thought an MP3 would be fine if you're stuck for space?

Don't see how how "quality" can be improved. If the source is recorded in 16 bit, 192kHz, how can "upscaling" work without interpolation ( or "guessing" as some might call it)?

 

[thewinelake.]

I think there's a bit of confusion between bitrate and samples per second. The bitrate of CD is roughly 1400kbps (44.1kHz * 16 * 2). One can reduce size to 192k bits/second or to 320k bits/second. Not really upconverting, just downconverting by less.

 

[Benedict_Arnold]

So what is a FLAC played back at and what is the best format to use given a regular CD source - assuming hard disk, SD card, etc. space is not a problem?

 

[andyjm]

So what is a FLAC played back at and what is the best format to use given a regular CD source - assuming hard disk, SD card, etc. space is not a problem?

FLAC plays back at the exactly the same rate and quality as the original file - hence "lossless"

FLAC is my choice of format - widely used, supports metadata, not tied to any specific platform or supplier - and lossless.

 

[Benedict_Arnold]

That's what I thought.

Thanks.