1

I have some very high quality FLAC files that I've purchased, which as a result take up a lot of space. I have the processing power and time, and I'd like to convert my entire FLAC library to FLAC Level 8, and replace the original files.

My goal is do this without any loss of quality. So, the files might be 96Khz/24bit in their original format, and I'd like them to remain that way when converted.

Is it as simple as doing -8, --compression-level-8 on the Flac command line? How can I ensure that the outputted file does not have any loss of quality before deleting the original? My concern is that the metadata about the file might say that it is still 96Khz/24bit but actually has become less through the conversion process.

It is a valid point that if I cannot hear the difference between 96Khz/24bit and 48Khz/16 bit, then why am I concerned, but I did pay for these files and I would like to not lose the quality that I've paid for.

Reference: https://xiph.org/flac/documentation_tools_flac.html

Improve this question
6
  • 1
    Next 'valid point' is who made the original 96k/24bit files & where did they get them from. There is so much hype behind high res audio, most of which is sourced from people with dodgy record players & some vinyl they think 'sounds cool' :/ Unless they were sourced from the record company & they sourced them from the original analog masters, you already lost more than you think you may save. [Source of opinion: 35 years in the audio industry]
    – Tetsujin
    Commented Apr 28, 2018 at 16:14
  • That is an excellent question. Everything I have is from HDTracks.com. Let's suppose that they are reliable and their sources are actually high-res, and they aren't just taking CD rips and upconverting them.
    – RoldGold
    Commented Apr 28, 2018 at 16:34
  • ah, OK. From what I know [which is nothing specific, but I pretty much trust their agenda] then your sources ought to be clean, which makes your question 'valid' [not that you needed my non-authority to grant you that ;) tbh, I'm not sure how to do it most efficiently, but to re-encode to broadcast wave [bwav] then back to your new flac would indeed be theoretically lossless.
    – Tetsujin
    Commented Apr 28, 2018 at 16:48
  • Alternatively, just encode to 320k AAC for 'general listening purposes' & drop the originals to an archive drive to put on a shelf until needed. Additional point... Most people don't even record their albums at 96/24, they use 44.1/24 or for film 48/24... which always begs the question ... 'did someone just upsample it to make you think it's "better"?' [people often record at 32-bit float, but they wouldn't export the master at that]
    – Tetsujin
    Commented Apr 28, 2018 at 16:54
  • Well I do that for transferring the music to my phone. I'd like to keep the FLAC on my local machine's HD. I'd just also like to conserve disk space. To me there is no sense in wasting it. If I were to look at the two files in a spectrum analyzer, would I be able to visually see the difference (assuming that one got compressed to 48k/16)?
    – RoldGold
    Commented Apr 28, 2018 at 17:15

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

Yes, it's that easy. According to the linked documentation:

flac can also re-encode FLAC files. In other words, you can specify a FLAC or Ogg FLAC file as an input to the encoder and it will decoder it and re-encode it according to the options you specify. It will also preserve all the metadata unless you override it with other options (e.g. specifying new tags, seekpoints, cuesheet, padding, etc.).

You'll need to encode from the original files to fresh files rather than directly overwriting the originals. Better still, take a backup of the originals before you begin.

To obtain maximum compression, you'll probably want to specify --best --lax -e -p -r 0,15 as a starting point, and then experiment with additional apodisation (-A) options if you think that isn't already slow enough.

However, be aware that the low-order bits of a 24-bit recording will be essentially random noise, and therefore incompressible - and at 96kHz sampling there are twice as many of them to boot. Don't expect magic.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .