Re-uploaded by request 09/27/2024
After replying to a commenter about the whole FLAC versus MP3 thing, I thought…
I'd rip this bad boy to FLAC & give it a go. I love vinyl, but in the here & now, we're all out in interweb cyberspace. Face it, spudboys & tomatoes. This is ALL digital, so we're squabbling over ones & zeros here.
My take is, depending on myriad factors: from computer or mobile device to speakers, headphones, earbuds; geographical location to personal preference; from software to hardware to wetware, it’s all relative to the individual. To the majority who are just happy to be able to listen to perchance some unique musick, 320Kbps 44,100 to 48,000 is fine.
Definitely lossless is ideal...if it is recorded & handled properly from the analog to the digital (I live for the depth of the Analog Sound), but is it worth…the difference to me in storage between 227MB FLAC or 96MB MP3 is crucial if the majority are fine with 320 MP3.
That being said, here's my first & perhaps only (those blue-finned fish are driving me crazy) venture into FLACland. Ripped from a nearly 40yr old slab of vinyl to 16bit 48,000 FLAC. It does sound great, but I can just listen to the record.
Here's a concept, kiddies. I do this because this is what I want to do.
Recorded March - October 1976 at Ralph Lundsten's Andromeda Studio, Saltsjö-Boo, Sweden & at EMI Studios, Stockholm.
Ralph Lundsten's Universe featuring the Andromeda All Stars – Universe,
Harvest 7C062-35340, 1977.
decryption code in comments
Harvest 7C062-35340, 1977.
decryption code in comments
Side A –
Universe Calling
The Space Sneaker
In the Shade of the Purple Moon
The Hot Andromedary
The Blue Planet
Harvest in Heaven
In the Erotosphere
The Celestial Pilgrim
Side B –
Rhapzodiac
The Planet of Winds
Lunatic Safari
In the Cosmic Garden
Space Funeral
Cosmic Song
See you on the Dark Side,
NØ
For what it's worth, I still prefer mp3s. I've got nearly a terrabyte of music on this laptop (a considerable amount from yourself, cheers again) and, no matter how hard I try, my ears remain analogue.
ReplyDeleteI remain a fan.
-Xtm
Thanks for the comment. You're reply is exactly what I hear from the majority of visitors here. Most folks prefer mp3s when all things are considered. & you have been around this dump for quite some time so I'm very pleased that you remain.
DeleteThe whole FLAC (or merely lossless) v CBR 320 debate is fraught with inconsistencies, I think. Too many people are prepared to write off MP3 as lousy. Not just lossy. True, I have heard 50 year old vinyl (FLAC) transfers which sound superior - to my ears - than remastered editions @ 320. Equally, I swear there are rips encoded via LAME which appeal to me more than their lossless counterparts. Artifacts or not. I read somewhere recently that the old DOLBY recording default was 192 KBPS. Which sounded fine until one played it through a seriously decent system. Whichever set-up you have for playback, I think, is key.
ReplyDeleteWhichever set-up you have for playback definitely is the key.
DeleteAs a 64 year old music lover/collector I want to weigh in on the subject. I look for FLAC simply because it is 'lossless', which to me means it contains all the musical information contained in the source the FLAC came from: CD/LP/whatever. If the source is itself digital we come to the 'digital-vs-analogue' argument that has been around since the CD itself. Simple science shows digital itself is ultimately a 'lossy' format. It all comes down to the equipment you use for listening. iPhone Earbuds, Dr Dre headsets, top of the line Sennheiser headphones, $15,000 speakers or, in my case, 20 year old custom built speakers I can't afford to upgrade and a pair of 64 year old ears that simply can no longer "hear" certain frequencies! As I say, I look for FLAC in order to give me the best sound to start with. I then convert everything to 320 CBR because I can no longer "hear" the difference and a 115mb file takes up a lot less space than a 320mb file on my hard drives, iPod and iPhone. I do have to say that I actually have 'heard' a difference between the 128kps downloads I first encountered in 2008 and the FLAC files I find today.
ReplyDelete-Brian
Brian,
DeleteThank you so much for your input. Very informative & more concise than I ever could have been. You are absolutely correct about it coming down to equipment.
As I rip a vast majority of the music I post directly from the original source: vinyl, cassette, or CD, I would say that I am starting as lossless as possible, so when I create the files at 320CBR, I am simply eliminating the step where you convert the lossless to mp3.
Anything I post that comes from other sources (second or more hand) I just post as I get it. I try not to post anything second-hand that is less than 320 to begin with as I also can hear the difference between 320 & other lesser (192 - 128 - whatever). If the file I copy began as lossless, I still convert to 320. If the music was ripped at less than 320 & then converted to 320 by the person from whom I got it, then I have no control over that. If I find better versions of things I have posted, I try always to re-up the better quality.
The very difference you mention (115mb file vs 320mb file) is the very reason it is not space sensible for me to FLAC or APE (an even less loss format).
& just one more note, the pair of ears that I'm using are a couple years older than yours.
Thanks for weighing in, as you so rightly say.
Heard these guys on Vintage Obscura Radio and was wowed. Would love a re-up if you can. Thanks for the good work here. Cheers
ReplyDeletehttps://www.reddit.com/user/ChercheBuddy/submitted/
Thanks for letting me know about the dead link. Re-upped & ready to tingle the ears. Here's the new decryption code...
DeleteRalph Lundsten’s Universe
ZKEV-URJ0IB149gHt0A9FPiyNY9snJKznKTugz7V5-4