Home› Given To Fly (live)

How big are the FLAC concerts?

LikeAnOceanLikeAnOcean Posts: 7,718
edited May 2006 in Given To Fly (live)
How many MB do they take up?

The weirdos keep saying they "crush" the mps in quality, but I think 256 kbps is pretty damn good considering I cant tell a difference at 192 kbps.. Would I be wasting my money to get the FLAC, if I can't even detect the difference?

Can anyone who bought the mp3s contest to this and confince me the FLAC elite people are making me nuerotic?
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Low_Light03Low_Light03 Posts: 1,227
    I have both mp3 and FLAC of the Toronto 1 show. You can really tell the difference. I didn't think I would be able to tell the difference but it sounds alot better. The entire FLAC Toronto show is 892mb and in mp3 it is about 250mb. You should download at least one show in FLAC and decide which you think is better.
    If You Give, You Begin To Live

    But You Might Die Trying
  • LikeAnOceanLikeAnOcean Posts: 7,718
    Low_Light03 wrote:
    I have both mp3 and FLAC of the Toronto 1 show. You can really tell the difference. I didn't think I would be able to tell the difference but it sounds alot better. The entire FLAC Toronto show is 892mb and in mp3 it is about 250mb. You should download at least one show in FLAC and decide which you think is better.
    Are you using a program to convert the FLAC to Wave? I'm realize this won't fit on one CD. Should I save the files as FLAC or burn them as WAV files???
  • tonywellingtontonywellington Posts: 41
    I use FLACFRONTEND it is free ware and can be found easily. I switched them to waves and burned those. They sound excellent. Judge for yourself, but I agree with low_light03 that you should at least compare. It seems pointless to say they are not worth it if you have not heard them.
    Barrie 1992 
    Toronto 2003
    Kitchener 2005
    London 2005
    Toronto 1 2006
    Cleveland 2006
    Toronto 2009
    Toronto 2011
    Hamilton 2011
    London, Ont 2013
    Buffalo 2013
    Detroit 2014
    Toronto 1 2016
    Toronto 2 2016
    Hamilton 2022
    Toronto 2022
  • LikeAnOceanLikeAnOcean Posts: 7,718
    tonywellington wrote:
    I use FLACFRONTEND it is free ware and can be found easily. I switched them to waves and burned those. They sound excellent. Judge for yourself, but I agree with low_light03 that you should at least compare. It seems pointless to say they are not worth it if you have not heard them.
    Well here's my thing. I've done tests with my own ears on mp3s.. at 128 kbps I can definately hear distortion. At 160 kbps they are much better but I can still barely hear the low quality.. at 192 kbps, I personally cannot hear the difference between mp3 and CD. I've never had the greatest of hearing, but its not bad... Now I'm hearing these are encoded at 256 kbps!.. I'm thinkning I will never notice the difference and it would be a waste of $5 for me... All my mp3s on my PC are encoded at 192 kbps AAC (which is slightly better than MP3) and I think they sound excellent...

    It bugs me when people say they are MUCH better because I don't beleive it.. to me "much better" is going from audience cassette recordings to soundboard CDs..
  • Low_Light03Low_Light03 Posts: 1,227
    LikeAnOcean wrote:
    Well here's my thing. I've done tests with my own ears on mp3s.. at 128 kbps I can definately hear distortion. At 160 kbps they are much better but I can still barely hear the low quality.. at 192 kbps, I personally cannot hear the difference between mp3 and CD. I've never had the greatest of hearing, but its not bad... Now I'm hearing these are encoded at 256 kbps!.. I'm thinkning I will never notice the difference and it would be a waste of $5 for me... All my mp3s on my PC are encoded at 192 kbps AAC (which is slightly better than MP3) and I think they sound excellent...

    It bugs me when people say they are MUCH better because I don't beleive it.. to me "much better" is going from audience cassette recordings to soundboard CDs..

    I used to feel the same way but you can really tell the difference if you listen in a decent stereo. To burn I just installed the FLAC Nero plugin and burn directly to cd. No need to convert to WAV. FLAC is def worth the extra 5 bucks for me but not for other people.
    If You Give, You Begin To Live

    But You Might Die Trying
  • rcsrcs Posts: 711
    Low_Light03 wrote:
    I used to feel the same way but you can really tell the difference if you listen in a decent stereo.

    I was the same way too until I tried it through a real stereo and not just my computer's speakers. I'm also 75% deaf in my right ear and I can still tell the difference.
    E agora? Faz xixi na mão e deita fora!
  • LikeAnOceanLikeAnOcean Posts: 7,718
    rcs wrote:
    I was the same way too until I tried it through a real stereo and not just my computer's speakers. I'm also 75% deaf in my right ear and I can still tell the difference.
    Fuck, I can hear a difference now!.. I played the begining of Big Wave at 192 kbps and from the cd over a few times and could hear very minor clarity over the drums and guitar levels and tones... This is gonna drive me crazy. I just spent like two days converting all my CDs to 192 kbps. I need to find a point where quality and compression compliment eachother.. I don't want to have 100 Gigs of music on my PC but I want the stuff to sound good.. What about 320 kbps?.. fuck!
  • natureboy46natureboy46 Posts: 165
    LikeAnOcean wrote:
    Are you using a program to convert the FLAC to Wave? I'm realize this won't fit on one CD. Should I save the files as FLAC or burn them as WAV files???

    If you use Nero you can burn the .flac files directly onto a cd - the conversion is done automatically.
    In the land of the little kings
    Profit is the only thing
    And everywhere the little kings
    Are getting away with murder
    - Paul Kelly

    www.troywass.com
  • Vedderman23Vedderman23 Posts: 859
    http://photos1.blogger.com/img/56/978/640/Aw%20Jeez.jpg


    How many threads do there need to be on the same topic?
    "Fuck the talkin', let's start rocking." - E.V. 9-5-00

    8/25/98, 8/21/00, 9/5/00, 4/26/03, 5/3/03, 6/24/03, 9/28/05, 10/03/05, 5/20/06, 6/23/06, EV 8/16/08, EV 6/18/09, 5/20/10, 9/15/11, 10/11/13, 10/27/13, 10/1/14, 8/20/16, 8/22/16, TOTD 11/7/16, 8/18/18, 9/2/18, 9/4/18, 9/11/22, 9/14/22, 8/26/24, 9/12/24, 9/27/24, 9/29/24
Sign In or Register to comment.