FLAC

[ViVe]

Is it possible (or more precisely allowed) to upload a FLAC-Copy of you files?

I'm always doubtfull with MP3 as it's psychoacoustic masking is quite counterproductive with subliminals or multilayer-Tracks... (it lowers the resulution of all sounds you can't hear concius)

Also nowadays even cheap MP3-Players are able to play FLAC-Files!

[sleepyjosh]

I agree that MP3 is really dated; it's time for sites like this to move on.

I'm not sure I agree that FLAC is as widespread as the original poster thought. Don't get me wrong, I love the concept, but let's face the reality people: Apple products dominate the digital audio player market; they are as much a de facto standard as Microsoft is in the Office software category. And unfortunately, to my knowledge, iPods don't play Vorbis or FLAC natively.

For this reason, I believe AAC and Apple Lossless would be a better choice. However, anything is an improvement over MP3. Let's get with the 21st century here.

[ViVe]

I don't even start the Apple discussion...

The real problem with ACC is that it has the same limitations as mp3.. it's no lossless format.

If the filesize is a concern maybe i could upload it to a webhoster and provide the link in the file-description?

[Liann]

Why bother?

If you can't hypnotise in the audible range, trying to accomplish it in the range of "sounds that you can't hear" is not going to work any better.

[sleepyjosh]

[quote="Liann"]Why bother?
[/quote]

Because you can get higher sound quality in a smaller file by using a more advanced codec than MP3. It's not just about "sounds that you can't hear." The sound that you can hear sounds demonstrably better for a given file size when properly encoded in a modern format.

I bring up Apple supported codecs like AAC simply because iTunes and the iPod has huge market penetration. It seems a reasonable standard.

FLAC is a nice idea because it is unencumbered by patents, but most digital music players do not support it.

[Pugugly001]

Flac doesn't have the support, but . . . it's not terribly difficult to *get* support either, and even in commercial mp3 players that support has become relatively common. The more relevant issue is that Flac Files, while small in reference to Terabyte level hard drives, are much larger in reference to mobile mp3 player platforms.

I tend to think any creator of it should keep a flac or multitrack file for themselves as an 'original', and maybe to be distributed upon request, but high quality MP3 or Ogg vorbis saves considerable space at very little loss in quality.

Pug

[sleepyjosh]

[quote="Pugugly/\[url=(https?:\/\/[^\s\[]+):$uid\](.*?)\[\/url:$uid\]/i/\[url=(https?:\/\/[^\s\[]+):$uid\](.*?)\[\/url:$uid\]/i1":16/\[url=(https?:\/\/[^\s\[]+):$uid\](.*?)\[\/url:$uid\]/i54c62]Flac doesn't have the support, but . . . it's not terribly difficult to *get* support either . . .
[/quote:16/\[url=(https?:\/\/[^\s\[]+):$uid\](.*?)\[\/url:$uid\]/i54c62]

To my knowledge, the iPod family of portable music players--the largest market by a wide margin--is hardware incompatible with FLAC and Ogg Vorbis. There is no way to play those files on an iPod; no "update" will change that. Do you know something I don't know?

I agree, Vorbis is a better choice than FLAC for downloading over the Internet, since it is compressed and saves bandwidth, but the impediments remain the same as with FLAC, so I put them in the same category: they're both Free, but they also don't play on the most common music players.

[ViVe]

@Liann - No... I guess you're confusing a few things here... the MP3-Codec filters sounds which are not consciously audible to average people to reduce the file size... note the average as well as the conscious... And I didn't say anything about the frequency... it would even filter normal voices if the codec decides that average people couldn't hear is consciously (as it is psychoacousticly masked by another sound)! And the fact you don’t hear it consciously definitely doesn’t mean you don’t hear it subconsciously! Goggle Psychoacoustic Masking for further explanations!

Psychoacoustic masking is the way subliminals work – but mp3 filter out sounds which are psychoacousticly masked… you could say the mp3 codec is an anti subliminal filter (the degree is dependent on the frame rate and the contrast of the subliminals)

And BTW – maybe it would be nicer if you try to understand things first instead of just ranting at people over things you obviously didn’t… just a tip!