Qobuz FLAC Tidal AAC?

[The Computer Audiophile]

I just noticed this album is FLAC on Qobuz and AAC on Tidal. 

 

I don't have a device or app setup right now to tell if the Qobuz version is truly lossless FLAC. Does anyone have the capability to check this? I was thinking about streaming it through an Auralic device and looking at the kbps identified in Lightning DS. 

 

Here is a link to the Qobuz version - https://open.qobuz.com/album/5024545383126

 

[rn701]

If you stream it in roon click on the star to see signal quality/path. That will tell you.

[The Computer Audiophile]

7 minutes ago, rn701 said:

If you stream it in roon click on the star to see signal quality/path. That will tell you.

That only shows FLAC and sample rate. 

 

I'm wondering if the FLAC was created form a lossy AAC or MP3. I believe an app like Lightning DS would show the bit rate of ~320 kbps if this was the case. 

[mansr]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I'm wondering if the FLAC was created form a lossy AAC or MP3. I believe an app like Lightning DS would show the bit rate of ~320 kbps if this was the case. 

It wouldn't. A FLAC made from a lossy source may be somewhat smaller than a truly lossless file. It may also end up a little larger.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, mansr said:

It wouldn't. A FLAC made from a lossy source may be somewhat smaller than a truly lossless file. It may also end up a little larger.

Thanks for the info. 

 

I guess I was unaware that FLAC would add so much information and increase the bit rate.

[mansr]

15 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Thanks for the info. 

 

I guess I was unaware that FLAC would add so much information and increase the bit rate.

Being lossless, FLAC neither adds nor takes away. An increased FLAC size is due to artefacts added by the lossy compression.

 

If you suspect a lossy source, you should start by looking at a spectrogram. This may have telltale signs, or not.

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, mansr said:

Being lossless, FLAC neither adds nor takes away. An increased FLAC size is due to artefacts added by the lossy compression.

 

If you suspect a lossy source, you should start by looking at a spectrogram. This may have telltale signs, or not.

But, if FLAC doesn’t increase the bit rate I should be able to play the album with Lightning DS, that shows the bit rate, and have a good idea if it’s a lossy source correct?

 

if it’s AAC at 256 kbps then Lightning DS should show that. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Here is the information. I started up an Auralic device with Lightning DS.

 

96 kbps via Tidal

~873 via Qobuz

 

 

[mansr]

7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

But, if FLAC doesn’t increase the bit rate I should be able to play the album with Lightning DS, that shows the bit rate, and have a good idea if it’s a lossy source correct?

 

if it’s AAC at 256 kbps then Lightning DS should show that. 

No. To produce the FLAC, the AAC first has to be decompressed. This may add artefacts that the FLAC encoding must preserve (it's lossless, remember). Moreover, the FLAC encoder works very differently from AAC and can't reach the low rates of the latter, even if some information has already been discarded.

 

Capture 30 seconds of both sources and look at the spectrograms. If one is lossy and the other not, the difference will be obvious.

[BrokeLinuxPhile]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Here is the information. I started up an Auralic device with Lightning DS.

 

96 kbps via Tidal

~873 via Qobuz

 

When played through LMS, I see a bitrate of 916kbps 16/44.1 flac for that same track.  I would assume these are VBR and might not see the same #'s based on how the apps calculate.