Best format for audio quality?

[idealist]

Hi,

I'm intending to obtain a Squeezebox (PC audio streaming device) to connect to my PC music collection. I'm wondering what format to use? Most of what I have now is mp3 (256k), but I'm leaning towards FLAC for better sound quality. (As I understand it, the files are smaller for the same quality as WAV.) But minimizing file sizes is not a priority.

Anyone have any suggestions, or experience they'd like to share?

Thanks,
:)
Michael

[Fedallah]

Pretty much any of the well-known lossless codecs (FLAC, Windows Media Lossless, Apple Lossless) should be fine if you're looking for the absolute best sound quality. They all do the same thing and do it equally well as far as SQ is concerned, so pick the one your hardware/software supports the best. I can't speak on disk-usage comparisons between them.

I personally can't discern 320k mp3 from a lossless codec on any equipment, so if hard-disk space ever becomes a premium it's the way to go. (I still rip CDs in lossless though, just to have an archival in case something goes wrong with the disc itself).

[hpsenicka]

FLAC user here... my experience suggests that FLAC files typically compress to about 2/3 the size of the original wave file... sometimes even less.

[Elfasto]

Pretty much any of the uncompressed file formats will work very well (such as wave, Aiff, NeXT, Paris, etc), but to shrink the file sizes, FLAC, Apple Lossless, AAC under a high bitrate and/or sample rate (I personally like AAC encoded at 256 and 48 kHz sampling).

[Cloth Ears]

I haven't had much experience with compressed files, but have noticed (in threads on other forums) that some people do notice the difference. As some of these are when using loss-less formats, I would suspect that it is the implementation (ie. the FLAC 'player' or the Apple lossless 'player') that might be at fault. I don't know if there's more than one FLAC player, but I suspect you might want to try all of them if there is...

I store my partners' gym tracks (she teaches at about 5 different gyms in her 'spare' time) in 128k mp3. When I've created CD mixes for her from these tracks (in 44.1 red book format) she has no complaints at all. But then, when you're competing with the huffing and puffing of 20-40 sweaty bodies (ugh! :sigh:) and sometimes other equipment (stationery cycles), I don't think good quality comes into it.

[gychang]

flac, play with foobar.

gychang

[JimJ[VT]]

FLAC pwns.

I've noticed differences between 320K MP3's and lossless files with in home situations, in a car the distinction becomes less obvious with road noise.

[Dusty Chalk]

I, too, would recommend one of the lossless formats -- disk space is relatively cheap these days.

[hdrl1935]

I own a SB, and love it. I started ripping my CD's in .WMA lossless just because windows media player is so easy to use. I ripped about 10 albums before I got my Squeezebox, then found out some limitations with WMA lossless files. So, I decided to try FLAC. I found out what a pain in the ass ripping with Exact Audio Copy is, trying to make sure your tags are correct. Then I ripped a few as .wav files. They don't support any tagging. Back to FLAC. Then my computer took a poop, and I now have Vista with Windows Media Center. I love using Windows Media Player, but it won't fully support FLAC. I'm really getting tired of spending alot of time ripping with FLAC, so I think I'm just gonna stick with WMA lossless and live with its shortcomings with the SB. It's supposed to be about listening to music, and not creating the perfect library. It's just too easy to rip a CD with Windows Media Player, and have all the album info, and cover art automatically done for you. If you're real anal, and have alot of time, not to mention if your CD's are not in the greatest shape, use Exact Audio Copy and convert to FLAC. If you just want to get it done quickly, and have all the info and tagging done for you quickly, use Windows Media Player, and rip to WMA lossless. DON'T mess around with lossy formats. Disk space is too cheap these days. Your call though.
-Derek:music:
Note: WMA lossless and FLAC with -6 compression take up about the same amount of space. They will be the exact same quality.

[Yamaha1]

I use LAME with r3mix, VBR new with 2 as quality, psycho acoustics enabled and joint stereo at 92kbps-320kbps, nice file size to exceptionally good quality ratio.

[Johncan]

Go with FLAC. If a better lossless codec comes out you can always convert from FLAC to that new format without any data loss. You can't do that with MP3 or other lossy formats.

John

[winters860]

For lossless, go FLAC for maximum compatibility with software and hardware.

UNLESS you've got an iPod, then go with Apple Lossless.

For lossy, go with EAC and LAME for VBR MP3s.

Unless you find EAC irritatingly cumbersome, then use iTunes to encode VBR MP3s at a reasonable quality.