this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Confidently Incorrect

4753 readers
1 users here now

When people are way too smug about their wrong answer.

Posting guidelines.

All posts in this community have come from elsewhere, it is not original content, the poster in this community is not OP. The person who posts in this community isn’t necessarily endorsing whatever the post is talking about and they are not looking to argue with you about the content in the post.

You are welcome to discuss and debate any topic but arguments are not welcome here. I consider debate/discussions to be civil; people with different opinions participating in respectful conversations. It becomes an argument as soon as someone becomes aggressive, nasty, insulting or just plain unpleasant. Report argumentative comments, then ignore them.

There is currently no rule about how recent a post needs to be because the community is about the comeback part, not the topic.

Rules:

• Be civil and remember the human.

• No trolling, insults or name calling. Swearing in general is fine, but not to insult someone.

• No bigotry of any kind, including homophobia, transphobia, sexism and racism.

• You are welcome to discuss and debate any topic but arguments are not welcome here. I consider debate/discussions to be civil; people with different opinions participating in respectful conversations. It becomes an argument as soon as someone becomes aggressive, nasty, insulting or just plain unpleasant. Report argumentative comments, then ignore them.

• Try not to get too political. A lot of these posts will involve politics, but this isn’t the place for political arguments.

• Participate in good faith - don’t be aggressive and don’t argue for arguements sake.

• Mark NSFW posts if they contain nudity.

• Satire is allowed but please start the post title with [satire] so other users can filter it out if they’d like.

Please report comments that break site or community rules to the mods. If you break the rules you’ll receive one warning before being banned from this community.

This community follows the rules of the lemmy.world instance and the lemmy.org code of conduct. I’ve summarised them here:

  1. Be civil, remember the human.
  2. No insulting or harassing other members. That includes name calling.
  3. Respect differences of opinion. Civil discussion/debate is fine, arguing is not. Criticise ideas, not people.
  4. Keep unrequested/unstructured critique to a minimum.
  5. Remember we have all chosen to be here voluntarily. Respect the spent time and effort people have spent creating posts in order to share something they find amusing with you.
  6. Swearing in general is fine, swearing to insult another commenter isn’t.
  7. No racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, xenophobia or any other type of bigotry.
  8. No incitement of violence or promotion of violent ideologies.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Carnelian@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

lol. They can’t hear the difference even with the most expensive equipment. The resultant signal from decompressing a FLAC phase cancels with the original signal if you invert it. Meaning they are indeed 100% identical. Lossless, dare I say.

Literally all it does as a file format is merge data that is identical in the left and right channel, so as not to store that information twice. You can see this for yourself by trying to compress tracks that have totally different/identical L and R channels, and seeing how much they compress if at all

[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This is like trying to explain to a SovCit, why they need to have a license.

You're wasting your time.

[–] Carnelian@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

No, it’s like explaining FLAC to anyone who happens to be curious about it after seeing this screen shot and wondering how something can be both compressed and lossless at the same time. Many people appreciate this type of information being accessible easily in the comments

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Flac is literally lossless in the mathematical sense.

[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

FLAC still cuts out part of the signal. It's limited to 20khz.

Bhat's typically well above the limit of an adults hearing, especially someone old enough with enough money and equipment to be considered an audiophile.

[–] moody@lemmings.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

FLAC is totally lossless. You can rip a CD to 44kHz WAV, compress it to FLAC, and then decompress it and get a bit-perfect copy of the original WAV.

[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Lossless converting a CD to FLAC. But that CD was recorded at 44hkz sampling rate, which gives you a maximum frequency of 22khz. You have lost audio above 22khz. Children can theoretically hear frequencies higher than this, but typically adults cannot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist%E2%80%93Shannon_sampling_theorem#%3A%7E%3Atext=If+the+essential%2CNyquist+interval.

[–] moody@lemmings.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

FLAC doesn't cut anything out though. Whatever input you use, FLAC compresses losslessly. You can use 96kHz 24bit recordings and the resulting FLAC file can be decompressed back into a bit-perfect copy of the original.

In the OP, the messages in red are correct. FLAC is like a ZIP file designed to be more effective at compressing audio files. And just like a ZIP file, you can reconstitute the original file exactly. There's no data lost in compression.

[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yes if you're transcoding a CD to FLAC it's lossless. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the process of digitally recording the audio in the first place.

Nevermind the fact that nobody seems to have paid any attention to the original joke which is that the boomers who can afford high end stuff can't even hear the difference.

[–] uranibaba@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

You began this by saying

FLAC still cuts out part of the signal. It’s limited to 20khz.

Recording from analog to digital is lossy, in the same way as previously described about images. But this has nothing to do with FLAC.

Recording from analog to digital is lossy

That's the entire yoke.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Even uncompressed audio cuts out frequencies. With digital audio capture it is impossible to capture everything. There will always be a floor and a ceiling. In the case of flac it’s typically 20-24hkz.

Audiophiles have moved onto “high res lossless” because regular lossless wasn’t good enough for them.

[–] Thorry84@feddit.nl 0 points 2 years ago

Audiophiles are just a victim of their own smugness. Human ears are pitiful to start with, but then the neural processing that goes on is even worse. We can't hear shit and what we hear we can't even all remember or recognize. And that's at a young age, at age 30 the hearing is already deteriorating. Hearing has never been a strong point for humans, when our fight or flight response kicks in, the processing of audio is the first thing to go. If we didn't use it for communication as much, we might have lost it even further. Even our sense of smell is better and compared to other animals our sense of smell is very weak. Audiophiles consider themselves special because they "honed" their skills and can hear stuff others can't. But you can't hone what isn't there, there's no fixing crappy hardware. In a double blind experiment almost all of them would fail even identifying a regular old Apple Music AAC file all the normies listen to compared to a lossless version. And when they buy expensive shit, that distorts the music in a way they like, they convince themselves that is the true version and all other versions must be wrong.

But hey, on the spectrum of all the bad and or dumb shit humans do, being someone with too much money who enjoys music isn't half bad.

[–] UpperBroccoli@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Actually, you see, it is not the original bits, yeah? They get compressed, and that removes bits, and then they are uncompressed, and bits are added. Those are RE-CONS-TI-TUTED bits. It's like reconstituted tomato juice, the taste of the original water is gone forever! And you can hear that. With music, I mean, not with the tomato juice. Like, who says it's even the same kind of bits, the same quality? You can so hear the difference. You want a double blind study? Well that's just silly, if it's double blind, it means its not blind, because the two blinds cancel each others out. Basic science, duh!

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

As an audio connoisseur, I will not settle for anything less than a private, live showing by the band without any digital assistance like microphones.

You see, when the audio goes into a wav file, it gets converted into BITS. That's not audio, that's food! And those bits aren't even used immediately--they're saved for later! They go STALE in the hard drive only to be used later to create synthetic bits, losing both quality and purity during the process. To make matters worse, those synthetic bits are used to make synthetic audio waves, which get turned into electrons and sent down a wire to make synthetic pressure waves. Nothing is REAL with digital audio. It's fake music made from fake sounds made from fake waves made from fake bits made from a fake copy of real, honest-to-goodness music.

It may come at a premium multi-million cost for a single album, but gosh dang-it, I'm listening to music as it was made to be!

/s

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

I went to school to be an audio engineer and audiophiles amuse me. While it is true that expensive speakers and FLAC and so on will make music sound better than it would on the cheapest stuff- we mix so it will sound decent on the cheapest stuff. We never mixed with you guys in mind. When I was doing it, we were keeping mp3 players in mind. These days, most music is mixed with streaming in mind.

My professor told us to take our mix out to our cars and drive around somewhere noisy and listen to it and then go and remix it after that based on what you heard.

Sure, there are exceptions. Not very many of them. Because companies want to make money from albums and they know most of the people listening to the music aren't going to be listening to lossless audio on $4000 speakers.

I find it especially amusing because, until the digital era, all the greatest music that was recorded since multitrack recording started in the 1960s was on bits of magnetic tape held together with bits of scotch tape and the engineer prayed that nothing would go wrong when it they were making the final two-track mix. It is highly unlikely that "what will this sound like on super expensive equipment?" was given consideration.

[–] TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

IVE HAD THIS GIF SAVED FOR OVER A YEAR AND I FINALLY GET TO USE IT

[–] tetris11@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

I don't.... I don't get it