If MPC standard is indistingishable from cd have I wasted my time riping my cds to flac, also if I wanted to encode to mp3 vbr standard from mpc, what is the correct setting for the mpc file mpc standard or mpc insane.

No you haven't wasted your time encoding to FLAC.

FLAC is a lossless codec.

MPC is a lossy codec.

MPC is only "indistinguishable" from the original CD in terms of what you hear. If you decode the MPC back to a WAV file, you'll find it different from the original WAV file (or CD track) from which it was encoded.

With FLAC you can decode to a WAV file and it will be exactly like the original WAV/CD from which it was encoded.

You can transcode from FLAC to another lossless codec (like WavPack, Apple Lossless [ALAC], or TAK)without loss of any quality. You can also transcode to a lossy codec (like MP3, AAC, and MPC) and it will be as good as if you were doing it straight from the original CD.

Transcoding from MPC to another lossy codec like MP3 or AAC means the resulting MP3/AAC file will be of worse quality than the MPC file itself. It will also be of worse quality than if you did it from a FLAC file.

If you want to transcode to VBR MP3, the best way is to do it from the FLAC encodes or original WAV/CD, not MPC.

Your can try MPC -standard > mp3 . I think it will be okay for non-critical listening. I suggest using -extreme for that occasional transcode in that you won't get anything offensive added . If you are not a perfectionist it can work out - I transcode 270 kbit wavpack lossy files to mp3 portable use when needed and it sounds great. Wavpack is very good for that and some have had success with MPC as well. As others mention use lossless for absolute perfection.

agreed.

i noticed (i.e. abx'ed circa musepack 0.90/1.0) a difference between mppenc/--standard and mppenc/--extreme when transcoding to lame/--preset medium.

when i didn't need to transcode to mp3 any more (i rockbox'ed an iriver h320) i went back to using mppenc/--standard.

...and really... an abx environment is a lot different than the real life environment of buses and city traffic, etc. that i was using my DAP in college - i probably would have been content just using --standard.

transcoding from musepack to mp3 works very well (but still lossy). go for it. especially if the transcode is temporary (i.e. only for a DAP).


later

Just so there is no confusion, it makes no difference whether you listen to an MPC, or decode it first to WAV and listen to that. Either way what you hear is identical, because when you listen to an MPC it is first being decoded to PCM to play it. It just is not saved as a separate file.

I believe what WonderSlug was trying to say is that the decoded WAV file is not identical to the original WAV file, even if there is no audible difference between them, so it makes a difference when you reencode to MP3.

Hes saying that the psymodel is then broken from transcoding which is technicaly correct as psymodels are tuned for wav > lossy. mpc > wav > mp3 breaks the intended masking effect , but there might still be anough masking for the listener not to notice.

I'm saying that it's better to transcode FLAC to MP3 than it is MPC to MP3.

Since the OP has the audio/music in both FLAC and MPC (via the title "MPC or FLAC to MP3"), they should always transcode from the lossless source.

FLAC isn't a waste of time as the OP alleges, since it's always better to do WAV/CD -> FLAC then FLAC -> MPC and FLAC -> MP3 than WAV/CD -> MPC then MPC -> MP3.