What's the difference between "FLAC" and "lossless"

[Skiz]

I know that FLAC is a lossless codec. Usenet has a flac newsgroup and a lossless newsgroup. I see on Usenet a lot of "lossless" albums that are nowhere near the size of FLAC albums, though they are both considered lossless music, obviously.

For example, Metallica's Ride the Lightning album which is listed in a.b.sounds.lossless is 36.57 MB in size. If I view that same album on the tracker Exigo, the album is 363.49 MB - 10 times the size.

So my question is, are they both lossless and FLAC is just bloated, or is the lossless category on Usenet full of albums that are not considered lossless?

[allen(s)]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lossless_data_compression

there are many kind of Lossless compression algorithms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lossless_compression_algorithms)

[Skiz]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lossless_data_compression

there are many kind of Lossless compression algorithms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lossless_compression_algorithms)

Were you going to answer the question, or just post random Wiki links?

That link doesn't even discuss FLAC. :dry:

[allen(s)]

i posted a link that tells you all the lossless compression methods:

Audio compression


Apple Lossless (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Lossless) - ALAC (Apple Lossless Audio Codec)
Direct Stream Transfer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Stream_Transfer) - DST
Free Lossless Audio Codec (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Lossless_Audio_Codec) - FLAC
Meridian Lossless Packing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meridian_Lossless_Packing) - MLP
Monkey's Audio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey%27s_Audio) - Monkey's Audio APE
RealPlayer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RealPlayer) - RealAudio Lossless
Shorten (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shorten) - SHN
TTA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TTA_%28codec%29) - True Audio Lossless
WavPack (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WavPack) - WavPack lossless
WMA Lossless (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Media_Audio_Lossless) - Windows Media Lossless

I know that FLAC is a lossless codec, but I see on Usenet a lot of "lossless" albums that are nowhere near the size of FLAC albums. flac and lossless are not the same thing. flac comes under the catagory of lossless.

[Skiz]

I know that FLAC is a lossless codec, but I see on Usenet a lot of "lossless" albums that are nowhere near the size of FLAC albums. flac and lossless are not the same thing. flac comes under the catagory of lossless.

So what are the differences? :rolleyes:

Quality-wise. I mean, 364MB and 36MB is a huge difference.

[allen(s)]

i dunno, maybe its a dodgy copy, try playing it to listen / compare the two. if you know the real size is larger, i would choose that one.

[Skiz]

i dunno, maybe its a dodgy copy, try playing it to listen / compare the two. if you know the real size is larger, i would choose that one.

You're leading this conversation in circles. Go back to the original post. :dabs:

[allen(s)]

lossless would be the larger size yes. 36MB is far to small to be lossless imho

[Skiz]

lossless would be the larger size yes. 36MB is far to small to be lossless imho

I don't think the "lossless" stuff is anywhere close. The current copy I have of that album is 256kbps and the album size is 87MB.

[allen(s)]

i think you answered your own question. :hooray:

[4play]

you sure that 35 mb isnt just one file. there is no way the flac version of any album will be 35mb.

[St0ry]

Even for a single song 35MB is a little small. Just because it's posted in the lossless group doesn't mean it's lossless for sure.

[mbucari1]

the flac format has a variable bitrate. It's much smaller than wav because wave files have a lot more in them besides music. Most flac songs will peak in quality at about 700-1000 kbps.

Anyway, lossless means that there has been no compression of the audio streams, and flac is a form of a lossless file. Saying lossless and flac is like saying processor and Core 2 duo. One is general, the other is specific.

[Barbarossa]

Anyway, lossless means that there has been no compression of the audio streams


Not strictly true. Lossless means that the audio quality hasn't been compromised in any way by the compression.

To use an analogy, a zip file or a rar file is a lossless compression method. The file sizes are much smaller, but no data has actually been lost.

Just think of the chaos if zip files were lossy :O

Anyway, by that definition, depending on the compression algorithm used, there can be different lossless compression formats that result in differently sized files.

10% of the original file size seems a bit too good to be true however. I'm suspectiing that wasn't truly lossless...

[Ludvig]

Lossless=non destructive compression

[brotherdoobie]

Anyway, lossless means that there has been no compression of the audio streams


Not strictly true. Lossless means that the audio quality hasn't been compromised in any way by the compression.

To use an analogy, a zip file or a rar file is a lossless compression method. The file sizes are much smaller, but no data has actually been lost.

Just think of the chaos if zip files were lossy :O

Anyway, by that definition, depending on the compression algorithm used, there can be different lossless compression formats that result in differently sized files.

10% of the original file size seems a bit too good to be true however. I'm suspectiing that wasn't truly lossless...

Well said.

-bd

[snowultra]

i hate flac, why would use flac, when you can you just convert into mp3

[Afronaut]

i hate flac, why would use flac, when you can you just convert into mp3

Because its lossless?

:p

[mbucari1]

I like lossless. Gives more depth to the music. MP3s sound a little tinny.