4 ms·
> It depends on the bitrate. A 1500kbps FLAC will definitely sound multitude levels better than an 800kbps FLAC. The same is the case for any other lossless con
by greyfade 14y ago
> It depends on the bitrate. A 1500kbps FLAC will definitely sound multitude levels better than an 800kbps FLAC. The same is the case for any other lossless container. The bitrate matters. Simply by listening to lossless music you won't discover 'sounds you've never heard before' as the author claims.
What?
Do you not know the meaning of the term "lossless" when discussing compression? It means that there is no difference between the decompressed result and the original source material. To do that, FLAC uses the minimum bits required to exactly reproduce the original sound waveform. There is no 1500kbps FLAC that "sounds better" than a 800kbps FLAC, because FLAC will only produce one bitrate for a given waveform.
- neya 14y agoNice catch, so I was actually referencing to the input quality of the FLAC. I will correct it, thanks.
- actsasbuffoon 14y agoHe could mean that the original recording used a higher frequency (44.1khz vs 96khz). That said, 44.1khz puts the Nyquist frequency just above what most adults are capable of hearing. Unless you're young and have excellent hearing, it's unlikely that you'll perceive much difference for anything above 44.1khz.
- greyfade 14y agoIf that's what he meant, that's what he should have said. The rest is complete nonsense.