November 7th, 2005

Recording from inside a parked car of rain falling on the roof. The car
was parked under a large tree resulting in very large drops hitting the
roof & creating loud impacts with a slight metal resonance from the


  • avatar
    bsu_student 15 years, 2 months ago

    OK, so I admit to not having looked at the specs before having a rant I was tired late at night and the sample I needed was a hassle to use - it's not another lossy codec - but that wasn't actually the point of my rant: Firstly, 44.1KHz PCM is lossy already and seondly that the reduction of data by .flac is not that much greater than a .wav zipped up. .flac like a zip for PCM audio. It produces sample-perfect reproductions with a reduced overall data bulk. It's essentially like running an audio file straight from a zip. But the reduction is only a few percent more than zipping it anyway - so what's the point? There's tons or archiving software around that everyone has, using the .zip formats and others. Why introduce another to squash a 10Mb file down to 7Mb instead of 8Mb. And as it's still got to be converted into a useable format for mainstream audio software I really don't see the point. Finally, since a 192kbps mp3 is damn good quality anyway why not just use that as the smaller dowload? I don't see the point in having this third format that is basically just a zip, but requires extra software to decode it witha minimal storage gain.
    Basically there reason for this rant is that as a pro-tools user, PT steal all the hardware resources. To previes tracks in freesound I have to quit Pro-Tools, so what I do is dowload a lot of files then audtion them in Pro-Tools. I can't do this with .flacs - I have to close my session, open up some third sound editor just for that purpose and voncert them, whereas I could unzip them straight from the PT dialogue. If there was a decoder for .flac that would decrypt the data into the folder from the right-click menu and thus in my PT dialogue then I would have no problem with it.

  • avatar
    Bram 15 years, 2 months ago

    *sigh* what ignorance. captainswarming, flac *is* lossless. Please read:



    If lossless compression doesn't exist, then explain me how ZIP works? :-)

  • avatar
    bsu_student 15 years, 2 months ago

    flac is not lossless. It just sounds a bit less lossy compared to compression methods. Compression is achieved by removing data. Even .wav are lossy - everything over 22KHz is discarded. I personally can't hear the difference between a high bit-rate mp3 and a flac, and since all major audio software supports mp3 but not flac, i don't see the need for it. Why use Audition when I've paid for Sound Forge and Pro Tools? I'm all for open-source and free-ness, but I'm also for ease of use. I don't need yet another piece of software to deal with yet another file format (like matroska - grr!)

  • avatar
    dobroide 15 years, 2 months ago

    Hey, Flac files are lossless and half as bulky as wav. Converting them back to wav is *very* easy, just search a bit around. There exists also a plugin to load flac directly into Audition, and it's great!

  • avatar
    bsu_student 15 years, 2 months ago

    ... so no-one can use it. If you can't use it in sound forge, pro-tools or logic, I don't really see the point. It's not even a compressed format. A wav wouldn't be much larger and everyone could use it. Still... nice recording.

Please log in to comment

  • Currently /5 Stars.
Flac (.flac)
4.6 MB
44100.0 Hz
16 bit
Sound illegal or offensive? Flag it!