For the record, the Search won't accept the string in my Topic Title. Please don't flame me I did try to look. So here's my question:

Is it OK, approved, accepted, acceptable etc. to transcode .flac to .mp3 or .ogg????

I've been saving .wav files for discs that I borrowed from my brother in case one day a new super standard in encoding comes out. With the .wav's on hand I'll be able to re-encode my CDs (and his) because I have the original. I mentioned this on another forum and they told me I was wasting my time. Since I already rip the CDs to .flac they suggested I don't need the .wav files.

Is this true?

I get what .flac is all about. What I don't get is if the codec is lossless than how can there be different levels of compression? Something has got to give if it is possible to squeeze the same size object into a smaller and smaller box. If nothing is truly lost at Q8 then why offer any other quality settings? Speed?

Thanks for the input all.

Po

Yes, speed. The different compression levels are not corresponding to "quality setting", but rather "complexity" levels. It's exactly like zip, rar, ace... archiving formats: they all have different compression levels. The strongest ones are also the slowest and are often using more memory but they are not causing any loss.

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes

I echo guruboolez' posting.

Anyways, FLAC's setting is not -q 8 but -8. Little difference in spelling, large difference in nuance. "-q" usually indicates quality; in FLAC's case, it's not "quality" but "timecost". The larger the number, the greater the timecost, i.e. the time the encoder spend trying to find ways to compress further, yet losslessly.

Note: I am not using any accepted standardized terms here, just some grabbed out of thin air, but hopefully illustrative

Very cool. I've got time for encoding. Could use to save SOME space. Going to see what the dif is between -5 and -8.

And it IS generally accepted to transcode from .flac? YES. No negatives in the tests right? I think I remember reading that .flac drops two other data files (for lack of a better word) in the .wav file so it instantly cuts the overhead without having to slice into the sound spectrum. Sound about right?

Po