Thanks for the video. I have been a fan of FLAC files for the longest time. When I purchase music online I always get FLAC files if that option is provided. I have burned CDs from those FLAC files and they sound good to my ears. I don't see the need for the bigger WAV files. As far as MP3s go when I do rip to MP3 I use Exact Audio Copy and depending on the CD I'll rip to either 320kbps Constant Bit Rate or 192 Variable Bit Rate.
I am in the process of re-ripping much of my music. I tried ripping a few to WAV but stopped, mostly, because it takes about 5 times longer than ripping to FLAC.
After going back and forth on my own between wav and flac and hearing absolutely no difference I just ripped all my cds in wav. Why? Just because wav is supposedly a “perfect” copy of the cd with no compression and because I don’t have storage problems. If storage is a problem then yes just go with flac. You will hear no difference.
I am exporting from the latest version of Ableton Live at the time of this comment. Given the user base, we can rule out something like this being a symptom of the software.
I believe it’s possible you’re using an Acer or Asus branded Windows device of some kind to carry out this scientific audio analysis and hearing your results through a pair of Beats by Dre just to hazard a guess? You won’t be able to distinguish these subtle audio differences that way yet. Alternatively, maybe there are just some frequencies you cannot hear anymore - who knows.
You may ‘believe’ that they sound exactly the same on paper based on what you are told is proven. I’m human and cannot possibly distinguish audio ‘bit for bit’ but I listen intently and make decisions with my ears and I hear a difference in the lower frequencies between the lossless AIFF and WAV formats. I have exhausted all possible setting combinations using multiple DAWs and multiple systems and the fact remains. And has done for years.
@@ImNotGoodAtNaming Oh im correct. You can have an MP3 inside a .wav container. You can have a high res file inside a flac file. Knowing the container doesn't tell you "which has more sounds".
There's this thing called levels of compression in fl studio it goes up till level 8.. I don't know if it's better or bad so i keep the compression rate to maximum 2 Help me out
All of the FLAC compression levels are lossless. A higher compression level leads to a smaller file but comes at the cost of slower compression process. On playback, the compression level of a given FLAC file makes little difference in playback performance. So basically it all comes down to how much space you really need to save. With today's storage media size, I can't see a compelling reason to use compression levels higher than say 5. Hope this helps, cheers
@@PopsMartin when you want to have portable music, flac could be the option, because the size and storage. WAV can be good even to portable, the problem is when you want to have in the portable thousands of songs, I go with wav, I don't worry if it is limited, I don't have problem to update my playlists and Sync my device a few times or several times.
@nicksterj wav does not need unfolding or decompress...less computation equals less jitter...listen to Paul of PS audio. ....is it enough to hear a difference on all systems or with all ears maybe not. I personally don't like flac. Much prefere wav.
MP3 is a very outdated audio codec (it's from the late 80s) that frankly should not be used anymore except when it's the only format supported by a device. Even the tiny Sansa Clip supports Ogg Vorbis, which sounds much better than MP3 at the same bitrate. Ogg Vorbis at 128 kbps is nearly transparent. But even Ogg Vorbis isn't the latest and greatest. That title goes to (IMO) Opus, which sounds nearly transparent at 100 kbps (for stereo music), and mono speech sounds nearly transparent at 24 kbps. You can even go down to 16 or 12 kbps for speech without much sacrifice in quality!
@@christopherwilliams2370 MP3 is still a relevant audio codec, especially when collecting music on a portable audio player. FLAC is much better than MP3, of course. The problem you run into is the size. For most people listening to music through their headphones while on the go, there is very little difference in sound between the two.
Mr Martin, you have no idea of how much of a proof I wanted to hear / listen / see based on this topic, thank you so much !!!
Thanks for sharing. I'm glad that FLAC is as good as WAV because I've been collecting FLAC music.
How? where?
mee toooo 🦊
ROFL BRILLIANT Thank you for destroying countless arguments, flaming, and trolling over this issue Fantastic analysis!!
Increible explicación 😮. Gracias por darnos este tipo de información tan valiosa.
Thanks for Demonstrating! Been ripping all my CD collections to WAV and now Flac.
Looks like flac is very mildly compressed Audio format but WAV is completely Raw & uncompressed.
bait used to be believable
Both are exactly the same, lossless data compression has absolutely no effect on audio quality, lossless is truly lossless
Thanks for the practical demonstration mate, appreciate it.
Compression ruins audio because decompression increases jitter in the analogue audio signal.
Yes. I also understand this and tested intensively. And I notice.
LOL
Thanks for the video. I have been a fan of FLAC files for the longest time. When I purchase music online I always get FLAC files if that option is provided. I have burned CDs from those FLAC files and they sound good to my ears. I don't see the need for the bigger WAV files. As far as MP3s go when I do rip to MP3 I use Exact Audio Copy and depending on the CD I'll rip to either 320kbps Constant Bit Rate or 192 Variable Bit Rate.
Even when you cannot find a FLAC file, you can also convert a WAV file to FLAC ;)
Best concise explanation with evidence… Thanks!
Ummmkay. To my ear, out my ProAc's...WAV whoops Lossless.
So well explained 🎉
I am in the process of re-ripping much of my music. I tried ripping a few to WAV but stopped, mostly, because it takes about 5 times longer than ripping to FLAC.
Aiff might be faster.
Thank you sir. finally, storage problem solved. Bye "wav"...😅
After going back and forth on my own between wav and flac and hearing absolutely no difference I just ripped all my cds in wav. Why? Just because wav is supposedly a “perfect” copy of the cd with no compression and because I don’t have storage problems. If storage is a problem then yes just go with flac. You will hear no difference.
Metadata didn't work on Android for wav file
For years, I have noticed that wav sounds slightly more bassy than aiff when I compare the same song exports. Anyone else notice this?
@nicksterj I was talking about simply exporting the same song in both formats and hearing the difference. My device is an M2 MacBook Pro 2023.
I am exporting from the latest version of Ableton Live at the time of this comment. Given the user base, we can rule out something like this being a symptom of the software.
I believe it’s possible you’re using an Acer or Asus branded Windows device of some kind to carry out this scientific audio analysis and hearing your results through a pair of Beats by Dre just to hazard a guess? You won’t be able to distinguish these subtle audio differences that way yet. Alternatively, maybe there are just some frequencies you cannot hear anymore - who knows.
You may ‘believe’ that they sound exactly the same on paper based on what you are told is proven. I’m human and cannot possibly distinguish audio ‘bit for bit’ but I listen intently and make decisions with my ears and I hear a difference in the lower frequencies between the lossless AIFF and WAV formats. I have exhausted all possible setting combinations using multiple DAWs and multiple systems and the fact remains. And has done for years.
Very nice video. What kind of level of compression do you recommend? eg. RX has option to do from 1 to 8
how to know which one has more sounds?
Neither has more sounds
@@TheTastefulThickness wrong!
@@ImNotGoodAtNaming Oh im correct. You can have an MP3 inside a .wav container. You can have a high res file inside a flac file. Knowing the container doesn't tell you "which has more sounds".
@@TheTastefulThickness it's a joke
@@ImNotGoodAtNaming ok
There's this thing called levels of compression in fl studio it goes up till level 8.. I don't know if it's better or bad so i keep the compression rate to maximum 2
Help me out
All of the FLAC compression levels are lossless. A higher compression level leads to a smaller file but comes at the cost of slower compression process. On playback, the compression level of a given FLAC file makes little difference in playback performance.
So basically it all comes down to how much space you really need to save. With today's storage media size, I can't see a compelling reason to use compression levels higher than say 5.
Hope this helps, cheers
@@PopsMartin interesting, thanks alot man 🥺🤝🏽
@@PopsMartin when you want to have portable music, flac could be the option, because the size and storage.
WAV can be good even to portable, the problem is when you want to have in the portable thousands of songs,
I go with wav, I don't worry if it is limited, I don't have problem to update my playlists and Sync my device a few times or several times.
Use what your ear likes.
Which application is that??
what app is that?
Wavelab Pro
WAV better
Decompression increases jitter in the analogue audio signal.
WAV will win in actual playback....flac requires more computer work and will be degraded slightly
@nicksterj wav does not need unfolding or decompress...less computation equals less jitter...listen to Paul of PS audio. ....is it enough to hear a difference on all systems or with all ears maybe not. I personally don't like flac. Much prefere wav.
@nicksterj believe what you want, I prefere WAV and I take the advice from the owner of PS audio over "some internet nicksterj"
MP3 is the best from 128 but it should be compressed with High quality raw file cautiously there is no difference
MP3 is a very outdated audio codec (it's from the late 80s) that frankly should not be used anymore except when it's the only format supported by a device. Even the tiny Sansa Clip supports Ogg Vorbis, which sounds much better than MP3 at the same bitrate. Ogg Vorbis at 128 kbps is nearly transparent.
But even Ogg Vorbis isn't the latest and greatest. That title goes to (IMO) Opus, which sounds nearly transparent at 100 kbps (for stereo music), and mono speech sounds nearly transparent at 24 kbps. You can even go down to 16 or 12 kbps for speech without much sacrifice in quality!
@@christopherwilliams2370 MP3 is still a relevant audio codec, especially when collecting music on a portable audio player. FLAC is much better than MP3, of course. The problem you run into is the size. For most people listening to music through their headphones while on the go, there is very little difference in sound between the two.