Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD (Read 8598 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

This is officially the most ridiculous thing I've read today. I haven't posted in forever, but after reading this, I just had to:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-20029913-47.html

Of special note is the last paragraph:

"So while lossless audio compression (FLAC or Apple Lossless for example) can be "expanded" to produce an exact digital duplicate of the original audio stream, that's not necessarily the same thing as sounding exactly like an uncompressed WAV file or a CD. To my ears lossless files add a glare or edge to the music and flatten the soundstage. Please don't misunderstand, I think FLAC or Apple Lossless sound perfectly fine, just not on par with a CD, when played on a high-end audio system."

Just. Wow. (...Or maybe I'm incredibly mistaken.  )

EDIT: *Sigh* I should have put this under the Other Lossless forum. I have been away for too long. Sorry, gang.

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #1 –
That's as funny as he was in Police Academy.

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #2 –
I think that guy means that buying a CD and playing it on a high end system will sound better than a regular person playing a lossless file through a computer into a budget system.  If not, he is a douche.  Either way, he sucks at wording things.

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #3 –
That reminds me, I stumbled across this (click). Brace yourselves.

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #4 –
It seems the article is as much about DRC as it is data compression.  At the end I'm wondering if he's comparing a master with DRC in a lossless compressed format against a CD without DRC.

This does not excuse sighted and subjective listening, nor does it excuse the lack of an apples to apples comparison.  It doesn't excuse any unsupported assumptions that high end CD players sound better than budget DACs either!

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #6 –
.halverhahn

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #7 –
Steve Guttenberg again?

And his talk about audiophile gold-plated fuses? http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-10210164-47.html

Seriously, I think this man has an audible schizophrenia.

He and his fans give a s**t about blind tests.

Poor people and their endless placebo and ignorance.

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #8 –
One might start a countermyth, that lossless has higher sound quality than the original -- say because, instead of reading from slower I/O all of the (redundant) bits, some are generated only in fast DRAM, and so with lossless compression you lose some of  the "glare" or "edge" caused by the I/O middlemen.  However, to fully experience the lossless advantage, one needs well-shielded, highly-conductive, platinum-plated stereophile-grade RAM . . .

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #9 –
It makes me wonder how audiophile marketing is legal but to steal money from someone is illegal.  Same thing with those magnetic bracelets and all kinds of holistic garbage.  It's funny how those people think gold makes things better.  Gold is a worse conductor than copper, silver is the best.  Hearing the difference is another thing.

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #10 –
Audiofool forums are full of clueless statements along those lines:

"WAV sounds better than FLAC"
"ALAC sounds fuller that FLAC"
"<random lossless codec X> sounds better  than <random lossless codec Y>"
...

And I'm not even talking about  same people hearing obvious differences between CDDA and 96Khz/24 bits (without any proof of course).











Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #11 –
So... lossless does have a ways to go to improve

Sorry if I didn't read the article, but it might be considered dis on FLAC to compare it to ALAC when I recall something about a version of ALAC failing to capture all the bits of the original waveform, that's very naughty thing for a lossless encoder to do. Or maybe the person was encoding it wrong.
"Something bothering you, Mister Spock?"

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #12 –
Quote from: mjb2006 on
That reminds me, I stumbled across this (click). Brace yourselves.


ROFL,this one just broke my knees:D:D this is freakin crazy,and the comments? WELLLLLLLL - those guys are "I KNOW EVERYTHING" TYPES 

great example of human stupidity or how'd i call that

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #13 –
Quote from: bubbleguuum on
Audiofool forums are full of clueless statements along those lines:

"WAV sounds better than FLAC"
"ALAC sounds fuller that FLAC"
"<random lossless codec X> sounds better  than <random lossless codec Y>"
...

And I'm not even talking about  same people hearing obvious differences between CDDA and 96Khz/24 bits (without any proof of course).


I had a back-and-forth on a forum one time that went something like this:

Them: "I can hear a slight improvement going from FLAC to WAV."
Me: "No you can't. A FLAC file contains exactly the same data as the WAV file."
Them: "Looking at your signature, you have a nice setup, but I'm afraid you'll need a better system than that to reveal the subtle differences between FLAC and WAV."
Me: "If a WAV and a FLAC sound different on your computer, then your computer is doing something wrong.

Perhaps I could have been a bit more civil than I was (I ended up going into a long rant about how lossless compression removes nothing from the signal, unlike MP3's lossy compression), but he was being awfully smug about his sound system.

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #14 –
Quote from: UNHchabo on
I had a back-and-forth on a forum one time that went something like this:

Them: "I can hear a slight improvement going from FLAC to WAV."
Me: "No you can't. A FLAC file contains exactly the same data as the WAV file."
Them: "Looking at your signature, you have a nice setup, but I'm afraid you'll need a better system than that to reveal the subtle differences between FLAC and WAV."
Me: "If a WAV and a FLAC sound different on your computer, then your computer is doing something wrong.


I see what you mean, I've seen that one crop up a few time ("my system is sooooo much more revealing blabla....I can't be wrong!")

Quote of the day for your enjoyment:

"I set Flac compression level to 0. When I tested different Flac compression levels last year I heard a difference between 5 and 0, with 0 sounding fuller and more dynamic."

I'm going to start collecting those and will post a compilation some day


Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #15 –
Ridiculous, alright. Think he has an agenda? Seems obvious to me.

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #16 –
You can't argue with an idiot.  They will bring you down to their level, and beat you with experience.
flac > schiit modi > schiit magni > hd650

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #17 –
With such claims he feeds himself.
In the days of Squeezeboxes and chip-amps the audio business has to create some myths that are reserved for Golden Ear (Wallet) Audiophiles.
If you spread some rumours just often enough there will always be some that believe.
If there is only the slightest difference in the way data is delivered, like decompressing for playing it sounds different, basta. You can´t argue there.

Not all people out there are that deaf as the Hydrogen crowd

P.S.
In another forum parts of this elite just discusses how much better a Windows server sounds against Linux with delivering the bits to a Squeezebox Touch. It fills the buffer just that tiny bit better sounding....
Is troll-adiposity coming from feederism?
With 24bit music you can listen to silence much louder!

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #18 –
They may as well argue that CDs delivered in green jewel cases sound superior to those delivered in clear ones.

Apple Lossless/FLAC < WAV/CD

Reply #19 –
Quote from: tuffy on
They may as well argue that CDs delivered in green jewel cases sound superior to those delivered in clear ones.


Don't laugh, this has been claimed in audio magazines already (during the "green pen around the CD" era).