Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Which Lossless Audio Codec, and Why?

Posted by Cliff on from the preservation-of-melodic-bits dept.

deadsquid puts forth a worthy follow up question to last week's query on audio codecs: "I'm about to re-rip my entire CD collection for the fourth time. I don't want to do it again, so have decided to invest in a small(ish) array and use a lossless codec to create a reference set of my music. From the reference, I plan on transcoding to a variety of bitrates (depending on where the final product will end up) and whichever format of the week suits the device(s) the transcoded content will ultimately sit on. I don't particularly care about encoding time, but would like something that transcodes nicely to MP3, WMA, OGG, and other formats in a reasonable length of time. I would like to ensure that track metadata is maintained in the reference, and is easily transferable when transcoded. I also want something that's not proprietary to an individual's or small group's whims. I'm thinking FLAC, but was wondering if other people had better experiences with other codecs. If you were to use a lossless encoding format, which would you use, and why?"

9 of 131 comments (clear)

  1. The best sound format: by Randolpho · · Score: 3, Funny

    .MIDI 'nuff said.

    *ducks*

    --
    "Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
    -Marilyn Manson
    1. Re:The best sound format: by zoeblade · · Score: 3, Funny

      MIDI

      Saying that MIDI sounds bad is like saying that ASCII has a bad font.

      My full rant's on E2 if you'd like more detail on the matter.

  2. Stay Tuned for Next Week's "Ask Slashdot" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    excerpt:
    "I'm ripping my entire audio collection to lossless audio files and I need a cheap large-volume storage solution...."

  3. We Need a Listening Test by Doug+Dante · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sorry, but I'm an avid audiophile, and just because all lossless audio codecs generate digital output streams identical to their digital input streams does not mean that they sound the same! We must verify that those bits still sound the same via our one way gold plated speaker cables!

    --
    The world will not get better through technology. We must seek to be better people.
  4. General slash response... by sethadam1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Let me sum up this entire thread so far and everything that will eventually be added for you:

    FLAC blah blah blah. Blah blah Monkey's Audio. Blah blah FLAC blah. Blah blah SHN! Blah. WAV. Blah blah OptimFROG blah blah blah. Blah blah. WMA. WMA?! Blah! Monkey's Audio blah. Blah blah FLAC.

    There you go: FLAC.

  5. Aye by numbski · · Score: 3, Funny

    But I have to say this:

    The audiophile with the biggest flamethrower is going to win out on this article. ;)

    --

    Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

  6. Re:Again? by ABaumann · · Score: 2, Funny

    If a $90 pair of headphones makes your audio sound worse then you really need to reconsider your purchases.

  7. Certainly FLAC... by AvantLegion · · Score: 2, Funny
    ... if for no other reason than the fact that it's so close to "AFLAC!!"

  8. Howabout by mugnyte · · Score: 2, Funny


    PCM? Then you could store it all on CD!