loss-less audio format with best compression ratio

  TomJerry 11:18 13 Dec 2004

I am thinking of getting ride of my all CDs because they take too much space and transfer all conten to a hard disk.

wave is the loss-less format, but it has no compression. I am looking for a lossless audio format with best compression ratio. I do not want mp3 because I want to be able to re-produce CDs in future if there is a need.

with lossless format, I can reproduce any format I want, be mp3 or wma.


  €dstowe 11:23 13 Dec 2004

"lossless" and "compression" are mutually incompatible.

Any compression system will result in the removal of data - otherwise it is not compressing.

Removal of data = losses.

  Rigga 11:31 13 Dec 2004


Someone else on this forum posted this a while ago, but I can't recall who.

So Try > click here < Free Lossless Audio Compression.

€dstowe, Compression doesn't always mean losses. Most normal file types have lots of redundant data, strange but true!


  TomJerry 11:55 13 Dec 2004

do not how it compare with MS's lossless wma

  TomJerry 12:29 13 Dec 2004

just found out there are a lot of lossless codec click here

Microsoft has lossless wma, Apple I-tune also has lossless format.

now I do not know which one to pick now.

  Completealias 12:39 13 Dec 2004

Guess it comes down to support for playback of your tunes. If your just going to be playing back at home then no probs but if you want to transfer to a portable device then you'll have to make sure that device supports the format you choose. Personally I'd go for a more well known format myself so that you can have good support for playback and portable devices

  TomJerry 12:52 13 Dec 2004

if I have truely lossless files

  €dstowe 13:10 13 Dec 2004

Removing even redundant data means a loss of data. This cannot then be retrieved.

OK, it may not be immediately apparent that data has been removed but, it has. If the files are further manipulated by, say, converting to another format (lossy or lossless) then the lack of the previously redundant data may be important and prevent the conversion taking place.

  Rigga 13:25 13 Dec 2004


You are correct that compression removes the redundant data, but lossless compression reinstates the original data during uncompression / expansion.

The compression is only maintained when storing, not playing or using.

That's how programs like WinZip work. If it damaged or changed files during a compression / expansion then no-one would use it.

So when you say, "the files are further manipulated", at this stage they have already been expanded, and are exactly the same as the original.

MP3 and JPG use lossy compression, data is lost during compression, whereas WMA and PNG are lossless compression as the original data can be restored.


  €dstowe 13:36 13 Dec 2004

I feel we'll have to take a different view on this. Note my comments were qualified by "may be", not will be.

My comments resulted from my experience of graphics files where over manipulation of almost any compressed format eventually results in a loss of quality.

  Rigga 13:48 13 Dec 2004


:-) Fair enough, and I do agree with you, using lossy compression is not good.

Using say a JPEG (lossy) format to store an image is not good news, as any expansion, further manipulation and save will result in further loss of data. But if you use TIFF or PNG both of which are Lossless compressed formats then the data is always restored to it's orignal state when you expand before you begin manipulation.

Try saving any image file using, JPG, TIFF, PNG, and then BMP. You will find that the BMP file is huge compared to the other files, as BMP is truly uncompressed. And JPG is probably the smallest, as it's actual losing data and then compressing, when it compresses.

Peace... :-)


This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

HTC U12 Plus review: Hands-on

Brilliant (and Weird) World Cup 2018 Art and Design Projects

Best Android emulators for Mac

TV & Streaming : comment regarder Roland Garros ?