If you want to pay extra (essentially full price), then here's a basic primer of how I understand things:
ALAC ... Apple format for iTunes. ALAC-HD ... Same thing, but better quality. It seems foolish to download these if you don't have high-end stuff.
FLAC ... Don't download these if you don't know what they are or how to use them. They probably won't work on a basic setup. FLAC HD ... Same thing, but higher quality.
It's my understanding that FLAC and especially FLAC HD can take up a LOT of space on the computer.
Presidential Advice from President-Elect Mike McCready: "Are you getting something out of this all encompassing trip?"
If you want to pay extra (essentially full price), then here's a basic primer of how I understand things:
ALAC ... Apple format for iTunes. ALAC-HD ... Same thing, but better quality. It seems foolish to download these if you don't have high-end stuff.
FLAC ... Don't download these if you don't know what they are or how to use them. They probably won't work on a basic setup. FLAC HD ... Same thing, but higher quality.
It's my understanding that FLAC and especially FLAC HD can take up a LOT of space on the computer.
ALAC is the proprietary format of FLAC. Both are noticeably better than mp3.... Even at my ears age. Apple also has an mp3 proprietary equivalent. [Just as a quick aside, you have to use "proprietary" a lot when speaking about Apple].
HD versions are the best PJ sells.There are higher quality files (eg MQA from what I understand but have not tested).
There are a surprising number of players that use FLAC... And phone apps. But it's unlikely that your phone has a decent enough digital to audio converter (DAC) so maybe not worth the bother.
Get a dedicated player if you want a huge improvement beyond mp3. Neil Young's PONO Player was the beginning of my journey on this stuff. There's nothing better in this world than Pono, a great set of headphones, and No Code (FLAC HD).
Yes, FLAC and ALAC are much bigger files than mp3's. HD versions are significantly larger. But worth it in my opinion.
I know I was born and I know that I'll die. The in between is mine.
Buy the flac for serious at-home listening or if burning to CD. You can easily convert the flacs to MP3 using audio software (Traders Little Helper is a good free download), if you want to put MP3s on your ipod or whatever. You might have to label the converted MP3 tracks, which can easily be done in MP3 tag (a free download).
on2legs
Standing in the Jersey rain… Posts: 14,943
edited September 2020
Well... mp3 is probably fine for most people and it’s a pretty standard format. It’s also cheaper.
You could go the FLAC route if you want better quality but the files are bigger and they cost more. You would also have the option of using a utility program to convert them to mp3 copies at any time if you wanted a smaller format.
1996: Randall's Island 2 1998: East Rutherford | MSG 1 & 2 2000: Cincinnati | Columbus | Jones Beach 1, 2, & 3 | Boston 1 | Camden 1 & 2 2003: Philadelphia | Uniondale | MSG 1 & 2 | Holmdel 2005: Atlantic City 1 2006: Camden 1 | East Rutherford 1 & 2 2008: Camden 1 & 2 | MSG 1 & 2 | Newark (EV) 2009: Philadelphia 1, 2 & 4 2010: Newark | MSG 1 & 2 2011: Toronto 1 2013: Wrigley Field | Brooklyn 2 | Philadelphia 1 & 2 | Baltimore 2015: Central Park 2016: Philadelphia 1 & 2 | MSG 1 & 2 | Fenway Park 2 | MSG (TOTD) 2017: Brooklyn (RnR HOF) 2020: MSG | Asbury Park2021: Asbury Park 2022: MSG | Camden | Nashville 2024: MSG 1 & 2 (#50) | Philadelphia 1 & 2 | Baltimore
Trying to use bootleg codes and not sure what format to use.
If you don't want to pay extra, just do mp3. Most listeners would never tell the difference anyways especially in a live recording where there isn't any studio subtleties, layers and such.
If you care about archival top quality files both FLAC-HD and ALAC-HD are the best and the same quality it's just a matter what you use to listen to them or your comfort with transcoding. ALAC plays in iTunes but not FLACs, FLAC are the more common lossless version for players that do lossless but often those players can do ALAC as well.
I typically do FLAC or FLAC-HD as it's lossless and use dbpoweramp to convert it to WAV or ALAC later if necessary as it will still be lossless and you could still do mp3s later if space becomes an issue.
There is virtually no difference in file size between ALAC and FLAC, but naturally the HD version are 2-8X larger than regular definition FLACs and ALACs depending on the actual Bit Depth and Frequency Range. I think most of the bootlegs are 24/96 so about 4 times the size.
Post edited by bone on
1993-08-12 - Edmonton, AB, Convention Centre
2003-05-30 - Vancouver, BC, General Motors Place
2005-09-04 - Calgary, AB, Pengrowth Saddledome
2005-09-05 - Edmonton, AB, Rexall Place
2009-08-08 - Calgary, AB, Canada Olympic Park
2009-09-21 - Seattle, WA, Key Arena
2009-09-22 - Seattle, WA, Key Arena
2011-09-23 - Edmonton, AB, Rexall Place
2013-11-30 - Spokane, WA, Spokane Arena
What quality would the cds have? better than flac and alac?
CD quality is equivalent to a FLAC that is 16/44. Flac does support much higher resolution, but the beauty of FLAC is that it compresses the file size (~70% of wav) without any quality loss.
I retired it since their tags don't work. I use JRiver media which is amazing media player. I've tried Music Bee as well which is good, but not as good or intuitive.
I retired it since their tags don't work. I use JRiver media which is amazing media player. I've tried Music Bee as well which is good, but not as good or intuitive.
I've never tried Music Bee. For audio files Winamp can't play I just use VLC Player.
To the Ops question, try FLAC and an mp3. You can find songs to download for free online. Listen to both, if you can't hear the difference then just stick with mp3. They are cheaper and smaller file. No point in spending more on a bigger file if you can't hear it. I don't hear the difference and am perfectly happy with an mp3.
What level do you guys recommend when I'm ripping a CD to Flac? I've been doing level 5 with Foobar, but curious if I should be doing it differently.
This seems odd to me. The whole purpose of FLAC is lossless compression. IE shrinking the file size while retaining the original quality. If there's a quality scale going on, then something seems off?
What level do you guys recommend when I'm ripping a CD to Flac? I've been doing level 5 with Foobar, but curious if I should be doing it differently.
This seems odd to me. The whole purpose of FLAC is lossless compression. IE shrinking the file size while retaining the original quality. If there's a quality scale going on, then something seems off?
It is just a scale of how much effort the plugin will put into squeezing every extra bit out of the finished file. Less effort, slightly larger file. More effort, smaller file. The things that matter, ie the audio content itself will remain intact and untouched in both cases.
Comments
If you want to pay extra (essentially full price), then here's a basic primer of how I understand things:
ALAC ... Apple format for iTunes.
ALAC-HD ... Same thing, but better quality. It seems foolish to download these if you don't have high-end stuff.
FLAC ... Don't download these if you don't know what they are or how to use them. They probably won't work on a basic setup.
FLAC HD ... Same thing, but higher quality.
It's my understanding that FLAC and especially FLAC HD can take up a LOT of space on the computer.
HD versions are the best PJ sells.There are higher quality files (eg MQA from what I understand but have not tested).
There are a surprising number of players that use FLAC... And phone apps. But it's unlikely that your phone has a decent enough digital to audio converter (DAC) so maybe not worth the bother.
Get a dedicated player if you want a huge improvement beyond mp3. Neil Young's PONO Player was the beginning of my journey on this stuff. There's nothing better in this world than Pono, a great set of headphones, and No Code (FLAC HD).
Yes, FLAC and ALAC are much bigger files than mp3's. HD versions are significantly larger. But worth it in my opinion.
If you care about archival top quality files both FLAC-HD and ALAC-HD are the best and the same quality it's just a matter what you use to listen to them or your comfort with transcoding. ALAC plays in iTunes but not FLACs, FLAC are the more common lossless version for players that do lossless but often those players can do ALAC as well.
I typically do FLAC or FLAC-HD as it's lossless and use dbpoweramp to convert it to WAV or ALAC later if necessary as it will still be lossless and you could still do mp3s later if space becomes an issue.
There is virtually no difference in file size between ALAC and FLAC, but naturally the HD version are 2-8X larger than regular definition FLACs and ALACs depending on the actual Bit Depth and Frequency Range. I think most of the bootlegs are 24/96 so about 4 times the size.
2003-05-30 - Vancouver, BC, General Motors Place
2005-09-04 - Calgary, AB, Pengrowth Saddledome
2005-09-05 - Edmonton, AB, Rexall Place
2009-08-08 - Calgary, AB, Canada Olympic Park
2009-09-21 - Seattle, WA, Key Arena
2009-09-22 - Seattle, WA, Key Arena
2011-09-23 - Edmonton, AB, Rexall Place
2013-11-30 - Spokane, WA, Spokane Arena
I prefer FLAC. Some MP3's can be hit or miss but FLAC has never let me down.
This seems odd to me. The whole purpose of FLAC is lossless compression. IE shrinking the file size while retaining the original quality. If there's a quality scale going on, then something seems off?
It is just a scale of how much effort the plugin will put into squeezing every extra bit out of the finished file. Less effort, slightly larger file. More effort, smaller file. The things that matter, ie the audio content itself will remain intact and untouched in both cases.
Does it still whip the llama's ass?
(Apparently not, as the post after yours indicates, but that joke never gets old.)
Oh yes!