Which of these formats is highest quality?

Wow, who thought that audio compression schemes could make so many people yell at each other. Ah, well... OGG is the best quality, and yes, it takes a little more to learn how to use. Winamp plays it just fine, granted you know what you're doing and have the mental capacity to install a few files. Again, if you know what you're doing OGG will produce better sounding files with smaller sizes.
 
The GreysAnd if OGG files are such shit you have to put them through a program to convert them. [/QUOTE said:
uf no you rip to them you fuckface. shut up you dont know what you're talking about as many others have already said
 
The ORIGINAL South Of Heaven said:
I like to keep it simple. Wave file if I care about sound quality, MP3 for everything else.


Why not rip to FLAC/SHN and save some space whilst retaining perfect sound quality
 
V.V.V.V.V. said:
Aren't OGGs gigantic? I may be mistaken. I just use mp3. I'm not really an audiophile, so whatever.
MATH 101!

Exercise 1.

a) Given a 60-second OGG Vorbis file at 192 Kbit per second and a 60-second MP3 file at 192 Kbit per second, which is the larger file?

A) The OGG Vorbis file
B) The MP3 file
C) They're the same size


b) Which sounds better at the same bitrate?

A) The OGG Vorbis file
B) The MP3 file
C) There's no difference


Please hand in your answers before this Friday
 
Ifurin said:
Why not rip to FLAC/SHN and save some space whilst retaining perfect sound quality

I've never heard of that format before. I don't have any real ripping program, I use Cubase SX, which is a pro audio sequencer/multitrack program, to rip them, and then save each of them individually. Most of the time though, I only keep music on my computer that I don't own.

So anyways, what programs rip in that format?
 
Ifurin said:
When you encode to a lossy codec, you remove data from the file - that's why an MP3 is considerably smaller than the original lossless files on a CD. Now, if you do this once, then it's fine - your MP3 encoder will try and remove sound that you can't physically hear, so you can't tell the difference.

Now, if you then take that lossy file and try and convert it to a lossy file, the encoder will treat that file the same as an original audio source, and remove data from it, resulting in even lower quality. Once you've taken away the data, there's no way of getting it back; you have to re-rip from the original source.

Converting from one lossy format to the other and then complaining that it sounds like shit is only showing how much of a clueless idiot you are, not how bad the codec is :erk:

Exactly. OGG is the best lossy format I know of, but I understand musepack is also very good. I haven't researched the format, though, so any information would be appreciated.

How do .ape files compare to flacs? I have some .ape files and they're easy to work with.
 
Silent Song said:
what? its true. and they are smaller file sizes as well... unless you encode mp3 at 192 or higher, wma is better.

Which essentially means that MP3 is superior to WMA... People who convert to less than 192 kbit/s are clearly insane or deaf.