Flac

>flac

Attached: url(9).png (378x374, 8.06K)

Go back to Any Forums you fascist scum

is there even a difference between flac and mp3? everything i download is like 128 kbps and it sounds fine to me, never understood the whole flac/audiophilia meme

Attached: 1616393767119.gif (100x100, 18.66K)

Why does that soijak look like a baby monyet?

It's not necessarily about sound quality. Thing is MP3 files lose data after some time. If that 128 song drops under 128 it ei start to sound like faggot. Flac is like 900kbps or higher, which means it will literally take the hoe like 100 years to drop under 128, so the sound will always be fresh for the whole duration of your life. That's basically it. 128 is the last stand before the music starts to have scratching sounds and shit.

lol

how does digital music lose its quality overtime?

Rotational velocidensity.

Retard.

Hearing the difference now isn't the reason to encode to FLAC. FLAC uses lossless compression, while MP3 is 'lossy'. What this means is that for each year the MP3 sits on your hard drive, it will lose roughly 12kbps, assuming you have SATA - it's about 15kbps on IDE, but only 7kbps on SCSI, due to rotational velocidensity. You don't want to know how much worse it is on CD-ROM or other optical media.

I started collecting MP3s in about 2001, and if I try to play any of the tracks I downloaded back then, even the stuff I grabbed at 320kbps, they just sound like crap. The bass is terrible, the midrange...well don't get me started. Some of those albums have degraded down to 32 or even 16kbps. FLAC rips from the same period still sound great, even if they weren't stored correctly, in a cool, dry place. Seriously, stick to FLAC, you may not be able to hear the difference now, but in a year or two, you'll be glad you did.

Attached: 1645484003468.jpg (509x378, 100.73K)