| jamster1111 04.01.2011 22:01 |
Why are people so OBSESSED with FLAC files on this site? I mean really???... Whenever someone shares something it always has to be in flac, and whenever it's in mp3, people have a god damn heart attack over it. Why? the increase in quality is so minute on a flac plus each file takes up 5 times as much space as an mp3 file, not to mention more audio players play mp3's. So why? I never understood the big deal and advantage over FLACs. So what if it is lossless? |
| inu-liger 04.01.2011 22:07 |
This belongs in Personal, not 'Queen - Serious Discussion' And you sir probably don't have good enough ears to tell the difference - either that, or you lack good quality headphones to do an A:B comparison (128kbps vs lossless) with. |
| Gregsynth 04.01.2011 22:19 |
Well 128 kbs vs FLAC is a huge difference! That's easily noticable! What about anything from 192 kbs and up? I can't notice too much difference. |
| The Real Wizard 04.01.2011 22:43 |
An mp3 is a digital version of what something used to sound like, as quality is irreversibly lost. FLAC, on the other hand, preserves all of the quality. When music is being transferred from old tapes, it's best to preserve what little is there instead of making it even worse by cutting higher frequencies and adding digital artifacts to the sound. But when most people these days listen to music from a 1" speaker, they'll never hear the difference. Not all ears are created equal, I guess.. |
| jamster1111 04.01.2011 23:13 |
But FLAC takes up so much room. Plus it takes much longer to download FLAC files. |
| jamster1111 04.01.2011 23:15 |
And I hear the difference, just don't think it's that big of a deal to take up five times as much space. Thanks. I always been wondering about this and you guys answered my question. |
| inu-liger 04.01.2011 23:25 |
jamster1111 wrote: But FLAC takes up so much room. Plus it takes much longer to download FLAC files. You do know 1TB-2TB hard drives can be had for well under $99, right? |
| The Real Wizard 04.01.2011 23:49 |
jamster1111 wrote: "And I hear the difference, just don't think it's that big of a deal to take up five times as much space." Then wait for it to pop up on youtube. Problem solved.. |
| Gregsynth 04.01.2011 23:57 |
Sir GH wrote: jamster1111 wrote: "And I hear the difference, just don't think it's that big of a deal to take up five times as much space." Then wait for it to pop up on youtube. Problem solved.. ============= That's when I come in! LOL |
| The Real Wizard 05.01.2011 00:00 |
Thank goodness the days of the deaf wielding their ways on the enlightened are over. We've hit a point where technology allows us to perfectly replicate what's on an old tape and send it around the world in minutes, and some people complain about the download speed of something they did zero work to create. Unreal, really.. Sorry to be a jerk... but complaining about quality never ceases to amaze me. It'd be like the McDonalds crowd going to a fancy restaurant and complaining to the staff that their food takes too long to cook. |
| Gregsynth 05.01.2011 00:05 |
Sir GH wrote: Thank goodness the days of the deaf wielding their ways on the enlightened are over. We've hit a point where technology allows us to perfectly replicate what's on an old tape and send it around the world in minutes, and some people complain about the download speed of something they did zero work to create. Unreal, really.. Sorry to be a jerk... but complaining about quality never ceases to amaze me. It'd be like the McDonalds crowd going to a fancy restaurant and complaining to the staff that their food takes too long to cook. It's an accurate analogy though, MP3/McDonalds: Quicker service, more simple, inferior FLAC/High Class Restaurant: Slower service, richer sound, superior |
| Wilki Amieva 05.01.2011 06:00 |
It's a perfect analogy, Bob. Another thing about the lossy formats is the re-compression artifacts. I can think of several ways of going wrong with that. E.g. A downloads a concert in mp3, then records it into CD for B, then B rips the CD and, for space reasons, converts the audio back to mp3, then sends the files to C, who uploads them to YouTube. "The horror! The horror!" |
| Queenman!! 05.01.2011 06:56 |
jamster1111 wrote: But FLAC takes up so much room. Plus it takes much longer to download FLAC files. ===================== Buy a Terrabyte of memory for 50 dollars and you done. |
| Dane 05.01.2011 12:23 |
Indeed... HDD sizes grow at a staggering pace, and it won't be long untill you can't get your harddrive filled even if you wanted to. I know a lot of files (especially movies) will also get bigger, but music will not as they had reached their limit the second compact discs were able to be read on a PC. They are converted to uncompressed WAVE files enableing your pc to read the info and send it to your speakers. (probably not exacly like this, but you get the picture) in short... Disc Space is no longer an arguement. |
| brians wig 05.01.2011 13:22 |
jamster1111 wrote: But FLAC takes up so much room. Plus it takes much longer to download FLAC files. --------------------------------------- Good God. We live in 2011, not 2001. MP3 was created back in the old days of 14k modems, so that music files could be downloaded over a few hours (!) rather than a few days. We have Broadband now (and have had for at least 5 years), so there's absolutely NO NEED for MP3 anymore! Sure, If you listen through an ipod, you'll notice no difference, but I listen to music through a hi-fi seperates system that cost me £600 back in 1991, and believe me, I CAN tell the difference between a concert encoded to mp3 and the original lossless source. Thank GOD for FLAC! |
| brians wig 05.01.2011 13:25 |
Sir GH wrote: Thank goodness the days of the deaf wielding their ways on the enlightened are over. Sorry to be a jerk... but complaining about quality never ceases to amaze me. It'd be like the McDonalds crowd going to a fancy restaurant and complaining to the staff that their food takes too long to cook. ------------------------------------------------ Point #1. Sorry. We haven't won the war yet. While ever the record companies think it's acceptable to sell mp3's and average joe in the street buys and plays them, mp3 won't die. Point #2: That's the funniest analogy I've ever read. Is it copyrighted and can I use it? !!! :) |
| The Real Wizard 05.01.2011 13:45 |
Haha, it's fair game.. have fun with it! |
| Adam Baboolal 05.01.2011 15:46 |
SirGH and the like tooting FLAC over MP3, I love you guys! It is amazing to see someone complaining about FLAC in this day and age. I'll tell you this, my MP3 collection used to be made up of 256/320kbps files cause I thought that was pretty good. And to some extent, it was. However, last year I overhauled my collection and recaptured all my CDs in FLAC and wow...the difference in sound is brilliant. Those who remember me on this forum know I'm quite anal about audio quality, qualities, etc. So, it may be a surprise that my song collection was MP3. But there ya go. Anyway, it's 2011 and when we're downloading videos from Queenzone like there's no tomorrow, I think complaining about the size of a FLAC audio file is a little bit out of date. And perhaps even a little bit ungrateful for the files being made available at all by some kind soul. Adam. |
| waywardgenius 05.01.2011 18:19 |
A band such as Queen whose sound is richly textured and replete with nuances deserves nothing less than lossless files, so FLAC is a perfect digital medium for Queen's sumptuous music. mp3 files are only suitable for disposable pop pap. |
| the dude 1366 05.01.2011 19:48 |
It's this simple. I love Queen and want to hear it in the best possible sound quality. I bought the gold disc MFSL remasters and the best vinyls to hear it better. MP3 kills the sound of the music I like listening to. I think it's great that there is some quality control here. Even crappy sounding boots sound crappier when brought down to MP3. I could get into the details of how MP3 specifically ruines the fullness of Freddie's voice or kills the sound of Roger's crash/ride cymbal etc, but that would be long and drawn out. The point is that I want to preserve this stuff in the best way possible, like many on here. And that is great! |
| Goodoldfashionedloverboy 06.01.2011 09:08 |
jamster1111 wrote: Why are people so OBSESSED with FLAC files on this site? I mean really???... Whenever someone shares something it always has to be in flac, and whenever it's in mp3, people have a god damn heart attack over it. Why? the increase in quality is so minute on a flac plus each file takes up 5 times as much space as an mp3 file, not to mention more audio players play mp3's. So why? I never understood the big deal and advantage over FLACs. So what if it is lossless? Hm, I think you answered on your quesion yourself. With the same success could be ask, why do you like CD rip but digitization you hate and call fakes |
| inu-liger 06.01.2011 14:35 |
Adam Baboolal wrote: Anyway, it's 2011 and when we're downloading videos from Queenzone like there's no tomorrow, I think complaining about the size of a FLAC audio file is a little bit out of date. And perhaps even a little bit ungrateful for the files being made available at all by some kind soul. Adam. Exactly! Especially when you're able like me to get this kind of hard drive for such a good price ($90 CAD) @ http://ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=49591&vpn=WD20EARS&manufacture=Western jamster111 really should consider getting one of these :-) |
| inu-liger 06.01.2011 14:36 |
-double post- |
| The Real Wizard 06.01.2011 16:46 |
I feel old.. I remember when 500 Mb cost twice that much. |
| inu-liger 06.01.2011 23:19 |
I remember when my first PC I got in 1997 had a 3GB hard drive, and good old Windows 95. Woo! (As an added bonus, I remember using other computers much older than that which had Windows 3.1, and CD-ROM drives that required you to load the CD in a caddy case!) |
| emrabt 07.01.2011 00:46 |
I feel old.. I remember when 500 Mb cost twice that much. ========================================= alas, i myself once saved up for 2 MB of memory and, i tihnk, a 20 mb hardrive for a commodore Amiga 500. |
| BETA215 17.07.2014 05:28 |
SHIT, where I live, IN 2014, broadband internet worth A LOT of money, and a hard drive worth A LOT of money too. My max. download speed is 130 kb/s and my max. upload speed is 40 kb/s. And I'm spending, around U$S 30 every month. To download an album in FLAC, I need at least 20 minutes... Looks like I'm living in 2000... |
| The King Of Rhye 17.07.2014 13:36 |
personally I love FLAC..............doesnt take too long to download with cable internet......I got a mp3 player that plays FLAC for like $25 (Sansa Clip Zip! Get the Rockbox firmware for free....awesome combo).........oh yeah and I got a 32gb micro sd card for it too.........:D |
| 99jaystang 18.07.2014 10:29 |
Question What do most people here do when they grab a announced download here on the forum? For me headphones are the best experience for me to listen to live gigs (especially the not so great sounding ones) I have noise cancelling "Beats Studio". My devices are a 2nd gen ipod 20gb , Iphone 3 with 30 gb and two iphone 5's 30 gb each. So yes Flac doesn't work for Apple, so i have to transfer them to ALAC, and then make a playlist of each show date. Files are big 30mb average for a song. So of course I will never share in this format but its what i gotta do to listen on my device which happened to be apple products. How do you guys listen to your live gigs? what deices you guys use. I rarely use the cd format. Because i can hold so many shows when i driving in the car. |
| scovel001 19.07.2014 04:00 |
Very slightly off topic - there is a really great flac audio player called audirvana does an amazing job with the quality of flac files |
| brians wig 19.07.2014 04:04 |
jamster1111 wrote: But FLAC takes up so much room. Plus it takes much longer to download FLAC files.And hard dirves are cheap as chips too; Just buy a bigger hard drive. Also, we live in a world of ADSL Broadband - some lucky folks even have fibre optic, so really there is no need to complain about download times. Christ. Maybe you should have been here back in 1994 when the best we had was a 14kb modem, then you'd really have something to complain about! THAT is the reason why fucking mp3 exists at all - because old modems were dead slow. If we'd had current download capabilities back in the 90's we wouldn't even be having this argument now :( |
| people on streets 19.07.2014 08:16 |
BETA215 wrote: SHIT, where I live, IN 2014, broadband internet worth A LOT of money, and a hard drive worth A LOT of money too. My max. download speed is 130 kb/s and my max. upload speed is 40 kb/s. And I'm spending, around U$S 30 every month. To download an album in FLAC, I need at least 20 minutes... Looks like I'm living in 2000...Some people and their "problems" .... |
| Benn Kempster 21.07.2014 08:42 |
I'm gonna chime in here on this. We're all talking about bootleg recordings, right? Of course, we want to hear them in the best possible quality given that the release schedule from QPL has been so incredibly poor for such a very long time. Many of us were collectors and traders before the days of the internet - waiting for jiffy bags stuffed full of ordinary old TDK C90 tapes (or if you were lucky a nice Maxcell!) that were many generations moved from the masters which were pretty poor recordings in the first place. The digital medium has made everything far too simple now for people - you can build an entire Queen bootleg collection now in the matter of days whereas before it would take a lifetime of connection with other fans and friends to build. What this has done is make people incredibly lazy. Its also made people believe that digitally, they are able to polish a turd and find that they have a diamond in their possession. A bootleg is a bootleg IMVHO - it is what it is. If it's great sound quality - bingo. If its not, then it's simply another one of those old cassettes taken from a 4th generation copy of the master that was recorded back in 1974 at the back of a hall containing 4000 people and recorded on a reel-to-reel with a hand-held mono mic. I completely understand the desire to hear the band we love in the best way possible, but what is there is there and in the quality that it's presented in - put up or shut up. |
| The King Of Rhye 23.07.2014 07:52 |
I'll just say..............the path to Queen bootleg heaven............get a Sansa Clip Zip mp3 player (seriously less than 30 bucks for a used one) and an sd card for it............and get a premium membership to 1fichier..............download bokkepoots Queen concert database.................and there you have it! |