> the people who are annoyed at FLAC vs MP3
What’s the story there? I didn’t know that was a thing and I’m curious to learn more.
> the people who are annoyed at FLAC vs MP3
What’s the story there? I didn’t know that was a thing and I’m curious to learn more.
MP3 is lossy. FLAC is lossless. So obviously a certain type of people are going to make a religious war out of it.
Essentially yes.
Flac takes a raw .wav and effectively zips it up to shave off a certain amount of space. (there are nuances, I think the compression scheme is designed for streaming.)
mp3 is perceptual, so throws away the stuff that humans can't hear. This yields a much smaller file.
However its all a sliding scale like PNG vs jpeg.
a .jpg with a quality setting of 85 will be almost identical to a .png in visual quality. However if you then edit that jpeg, the image degrades and you start to see artifacts. (hence why memes look like shite as they get older)
Its the same with mp3s if you compress the hell out of them, say 64kbit or lower adaptive, then you'll start to hear the tell tail "schlop" noise of mp3-like compression. You might notice it most with cymbals in drum kits. cymbals are wideband noise. as in there are loads of constituent frequencies so if you remove some of the "hidden" frequencies you tend to notice, so they sound more metallic, ironically.
But, all of this is solvable, 256+kbit is more than enough, bonus points for higher sampling frequencies. (however you need a decoder that can actually do that sample rate...)