What do you guys think of FLAC? I personally think all music

fact: flac is for nerds

it's just science

Better than vinyl.

>>72953992
yeah all androids support flac natively in google play music

i use it or 320cbr as often as possible. ogg is for nerds

FLAC AND OPUS OR FUCK OFF

I guess you all must have few digital music

>>72953992
I try to download most music that I am passionate about in flac, probably makes up about 30-50% of my library. Most is still 320 mp3, some isn't available in more than 192 sadly.

>>72955476
Maybe we can just afford harddrives.

I don't use flac since if I did I would barely be able to fit a fourth of my music on my iPod if I did. If the quality takes away from my enjoyment of an album, I'll care but so far the quality has never affected my listening experience.

>>72955528
I have over 2TB of music
Over 32 thousand albums
I don't want to know how much could this be on FLAC

flac is to mp3 as .png is to .jpg

much better in nearly every way but still will not become the standard entirely due to just how famous its competitor is.
people are choosing shit quality because they're familiar with it.

>>72954055
A huge amount of the music in Google Play Music All Access is in .flac, anyway. So almost all of the music in there is very high quality, which is nice. I remember when they first introduced it and I ended up replacing all the shitty mp3 copies I could find with the All Access versions because they sounded better.

>>72954029
no shit sherlock

File: mixYlarOiuf9hDtWB5_LLXX6AddGs7T_btx8JIITT7I.jpg (113KB, 747x723px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 747x723px

What the fuck are you talking about, apple shill aac (the supreme compressed format)

File: just.png (1MB, 1915x542px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1915x542px

>download .flac
>see this

>>72953992
Waste of bandwidth

>>72956142
.png is bloat, useless for general purposes
People like you are why my internet bill is so dang high (j.k., that's streaming's fault)

>>72955912
Assuming your music is in ~320kbps, 6-7TB.

Hearing the difference now isn't the reason to encode to FLAC. FLAC uses lossless compression, while MP3 is 'lossy'. What this means is that for each year the MP3 sits on your hard drive, it will lose roughly 12kbps, assuming you have SATA - it's about 15kbps on IDE, but only 7kbps on SCSI, due to rotational velocidensity. You don't want to know how much worse it is on CD-ROM or other optical media.

I started collecting MP3s in about 2001, and if I try to play any of the tracks I downloaded back then, even the stuff I grabbed at 320kbps, they just sound like crap. The bass is terrible, the midrange…well don’t get me started. Some of those albums have degraded down to 32 or even 16kbps. FLAC rips from the same period still sound great, even if they weren’t stored correctly, in a cool, dry place. Seriously, stick to FLAC, you may not be able to hear the difference now, but in a year or two, you’ll be glad you did.

File: 1467257650254.jpg (108KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 960x540px

>>72956705

>>72953992
.flac + .alac masterrace

>>72956705
I miss the hdd jokes…

Sincerely I would like to come back to mp3 era. Now if the music isn't FLAC format, I feel it like a shit.
30% of my music is in FLAC format but is so really heavyweight. Even my SD card is full (128 gb).
You will hate me but I used to compress the music to 64 kbps in m4a format and I was happy with, still I have files with 64 kbps because sounds very good. Usually the "old" music seldom get lossy with digital compression.

File: music listening experiences.png (1MB, 855x1202px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 855x1202px

one step above pleb

>>72956705
memelording aside, I've got some CDs I burned ages ago to listen to in my car (no aux port or anything) and the later tracks on the CDs are unlistenable now because they just jump so much

>>72958261
What about the Hi-Res files or Blu-Ray audio?

>>72958261
I think you missed the point of that meme format

It doesn't matter what lossless or lossy codec you use. All that matters is bitrate.

If its 256 AAC or 320 MP3 it doesn't matter.

>>72953992
wav fags get out

>>72958384
Some of them work better than others, though. Any modern codec is better than MP3 because it always cuts frequencies.

>>72956508
>24bit 96kHz rip!
>enjoy! don't forget to seed!
what do