Best FLAC converter software

[manueljenkin]

1 minute ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

[...] Example: download Audio Transcoder and, using it, convert just 1 of your favorite albums into WAV and listen. Then tell us what you think. All of this will take you half an hour max and you will learn something useful. No need to pay either since they offer a free trial period... [...]

I've persuaded people to try a dozen music player software, none of which I coded or had any part into.

[AnotherSpin]

Just now, manueljenkin said:

You can be. I don't have to persuade otherwise since I donot have any idea about the two people. But the posts atleast were harmless (and actually useful) until they were poked.

 

BTW, did you try Audio Transcoder? It's free to try. What are results? No poking, I am serious.

[manueljenkin]

5 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

BTW, did you try Audio Transcoder? It's free to try. What are results? No poking, I am serious.

Well I'm doing certain critical stuff with my system and can't risk changing anything atm (unless it's a live cd I can try). Might take some time before I can try it. I just wanted the thread to evolve so by the time I get to try I could get filtered options. The pitch felt legit, with respect to my previous experiences with one particular player.

 

This is the old thread I made. I have been off audio for like 2 month now (phone + uapp is how I go by these days, since I can't use pc).

 

I would be interested if anyone who is into trying these different converters could add up to this thread after making fairly thorough analysis. I've populated as much as I could wrt music playback software.

 

[AnotherSpin]

10 minutes ago, manueljenkin said:

Well I'm doing certain critical stuff with my system and can't risk changing anything atm (unless it's a live cd I can try). Might take some time before I can try it. I just wanted the thread to evolve so by the time I get to try I could get filtered options. The pitch felt legit, with respect to my previous experiences with one particular player.

 

This is the old thread I made. I have been off audio for like 2 month now (phone + uapp is how I go by these days, since I can't use pc).

 

I would be interested if anyone who is into trying these different converters could add up to this thread after making fairly thorough analysis. I've populated as much as I could wrt music playback software.

 

 

Yes, I have seen your thread before, lot of useful info. Unfortunately, there are no mac OS players in it (if I remember it well), which is completely natural, not everyone uses mac OS. Over many years I have tried, I guess, all the available software players for mac OS, plus those that can be booted regardless of the OS, like the wtf player. Eventually, I stopped at HQP, for me and my system this player is better suited than Amarra, Fidelia, Audirvana, VOX, etc. For HQP, converting files from FLAC to WAV makes no noticeable effect in comparison, for example, with the placement of files before reply on the virtual RAM disc, which has already been mentioned above.

 

I can't help but notice that none of the defenders of the two banned posters have tried their wonderful converter. A mystery... 😀

[manueljenkin]

43 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

Yes, I have seen your thread before, lot of useful info. Unfortunately, there are no mac OS players in it (if I remember it well), which is completely natural, not everyone uses mac OS. Over many years I have tried, I guess, all the available software players for mac OS, plus those that can be booted regardless of the OS, like the wtf player. Eventually, I stopped at HQP, for me and my system this player is better suited than Amarra, Fidelia, Audirvana, VOX, etc. For HQP, converting files from FLAC to WAV makes no noticeable effect in comparison, for example, with the placement of files before reply on the virtual RAM disc, which has already been mentioned above.

 

I can't help but notice that none of the defenders of the two banned posters have tried their wonderful converter. A mystery... 😀

I do have a MacBook Air, albeit an old one, but I haven't used it much. When I get some time I could try up some software on it and see. Made a short list. Most tools in Mac require significant investment which makes it harder for me to try things out as well. Most of the software I've compared so far are free.

 

I am not defending their suggested converter, I am just saying they should have been given a chance to express their findings, just the same way I was granted a chance. I didn't come up with this entire list myself. I started off with few players, then I got recommendations from friends and other threads and that's how this big list was built up. This thread could have been something similar.

[AnotherSpin]

Wow. Here is a 2 reviews screenshoots from download.net Audio Transcoder page. Several other reviews confirm the information about the spy software. There are also stereotypical short reviews with praises.

 

[manueljenkin]

3 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

Wow. Here is a 2 reviews screenshoots from download.net Audio Transcoder page. Several other reviews confirm the information about the spy software. There are also stereotypical short reviews with praises.

 

I see. I might have spotted it in case I've tried. Thanks for letting me know. It may or may not have been a spy software (unless you can confirm, since I haven't tried), I've had a few software ask to install an additional browser toolbar or so.

 

That requirement of normalisation though. Probably he doesn't understand the possible penalty of that.

[AnotherSpin]

Just now, manueljenkin said:

I see. I might have spotted it in case I've tried. Thanks for letting me know. It may or may not have been a spy software (unless you can confirm, since I haven't tried), I've had a few software ask to install an additional browser toolbar or so.

 

As I do not have and didn't have Windows based computers for ages, I can not try this program. Sorry.

[sandyk]

2 hours ago, manueljenkin said:

You can be. I don't have to persuade otherwise since I donot have any idea about the two people. But the posts atleast were harmless (and actually useful) until they were poked.

I found Cappo (Alexander) to be interested in other experiences when I decided to sound him  out via a few PMs.

 The photo of his equipment  that I posted came from our PM discussion.

Quote

. . . . if you are interested. For now, I've attached a few pics of my music PC and the external linear PS for the SOtM tX-USBexp. The pics should give you an idea why I clearly hear the difference between FLAC and WAV here. (BTW, the rest of my system is modded and tweaked to similarly insane level.)

 

Kind regards,

Alexander

He explained that his friend however did not have a good command of the English language and felt attacked.  

 

BTW, I have yet to find much S/W recently, including YouTube downloaders , that doesn't try to install a sponsor's software, and for that reason very rarely take the risk. Despite the claims , it usually turns out to be a limited functionality trial version for paid software, or keeps nagging you to try other of their products.

 Norton has on quite a few occasions told me that a product I have is spyware and sometimes blocks updates, or deletes downloads of programs that I know are safe.

Some of those damn browser toolbars are very hard to remove again too

[sandyk]

Incidentally, these days I usually create a System Restore point immediately before installing unknown S/W

[AnotherSpin]

2 hours ago, sandyk said:

I found Cappo (Alexander) to be interested in other experiences when I decided to sound him  out via a few PMs.

[...]

 

It's a pity you didn't tell us right away that you were communicating privately with our aggressive black mouthed friend. It is well possible that he did not really tried to sell the spyware on the forum. 

 

One way or another, I got some benefit from the discussion after all. I returned to using a long-forgotten tweak. A small free (no spyware) program RamDiskCreator for MacOS allows you to create a virtual RAM disk. I am hearing interesting sound improvements. The acoustic bass of Scott LaFaro in the recording of Bill Evans Trio' Moon Beams sounds frighteningly realistic. 

[bogi]

5 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

As I do not have and didn't have Windows based computers for ages, I can not try this program. Sorry.

 

I have Windows computer. When Vlodzimierz inserted picture of Audio Transcoder into his post, I went into the product web. I could not find any information about developers of Audio Transcoder and I found their contact page is totally anonymous - no info who they are, where they are from, no history of their work. No link to user support forum. I searched for forum discussions really discussing their product on internet and I found nothing. On the Vlodzimierz's picture he is showing "Copyright (R) Digital Music Software", but I didn't find any web link pointing to company of such a name.

 

In such a case I do not tend to install an executable into my notebook. So I closed their page and that's all.

They wanted that we install the product, that's clear. If an unknown person asks others to install some unknown product, which does not have any really serious references, then such a person looks suspicious to me, sorry. Therefore I didn't went into direct communication with them. If Chris thought in a similar way, then I quite understand his position.

[AnotherSpin]

1 hour ago, bogi said:

 

I have Windows computer. When Vlodzimierz inserted picture of Audio Transcoder into his post, I went into the product web. I could not find any information about developers of Audio Transcoder and I found their contact page is totally anonymous - no info who they are, where they are from, no history of their work. No link to user support forum. I searched for forum discussions really discussing their product on internet and I found nothing. On the Vlodzimierz's picture he is showing "Copyright (R) Digital Music Software", but I didn't find any web link pointing to company of such a name.

 

In such a case I do not tend to install an executable into my notebook. So I closed their page and that's all.

They wanted that we install the product, that's clear. If an unknown person asks others to install some unknown product, which does not have any really serious references, then such a person looks suspicious to me, sorry. Therefore I didn't went into direct communication with them. If Chris thought in a similar way, then I quite understand his position.

 

Here is the screen from Audio Transcoder web page. As any one could see, nothing related to Ukraine. It is Russia, friends. And quite habitual method of Russian hackers - to pass themselves off as Ukrainians. Also, the name Vlodziemerz definitely sounds Polish. Not many people from Poland live in Novosibirsk, Siberia, I guess. Funny, or not? http://www.audio-transcoder.com/about :

 

 

[bogi]

That's not how user support usually looks. Usually you see at least some interaction between support and customers.

[AnotherSpin]

Just now, bogi said:

That's not how user support usually looks. Usually you see at least some interaction between support and customers.

 

They didn't care to bother.

[sandyk]

2 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

They didn't care to bother.

These days many companies worldwide have very poor Customer Support and may even try to fob you off to a poorly implemented  piece of S/W with limited capabilities which leaves you high and dry if your query doesn't match what's  in their limited programming. 

 However, say something they don't wish to be seen in silly Social Media and you may often get a quick response.

[AnotherSpin]

10 minutes ago, sandyk said:

These days many companies worldwide have very poor Customer Support and may even try to fob you off to a poorly implemented  piece of S/W with limited capabilities which leaves you high and dry if your query doesn't match what's  in their limited programming. 

 However, say something they don't wish to be seen in silly Social Media and you may often get a quick response.

 

I do not use many software products beyond those which come with OS. I do not remember any problems in communication with developers, to be honest. Maybe because I do not have software developed in Siberia.

[bogi]

sandyk, look more at this formulation:

 

Quote

Digital Music Software an independent software developing variety of multimedia programs that help you have fun with your music on Windows. We develop easy-to-use and powerful software that inspires people to edit, enhance, and share their content. Our ever-expanding range of products is sold in more than 200 countries.

 

1) The text is too general. It's not usual to describe a company so generally, for example without naming their other real products and without any specific information about their past achievements. It does not look to me like a real company description.

2) If their "ever-expanding range of products" would exist, their exact names would be somewhere mentioned on the page together with links. I made web search and attempted to find their further products, but found nothing, what would be related to "Digital Music Software" company.

3) Where is the company web page? We know Audio Transcoder webpage, but Digital Music Software, developing expanding range of products, where it is??

 

The product Audio Transcoder really exists and different download portals mention few older versions too, so most probably it is really under active development. But the rest ... Four-flushing is nothing unexpected in Russia.

[kumakuma]

1 hour ago, bogi said:

sandyk, look more at this formulation:

 

 

1) The text is too general. It's not usual to describe a company so generally, for example without naming their other real products and without any specific information about their past achievements. It does not look to me like a real company description.

2) If their "ever-expanding range of products" would exist, their exact names would be somewhere mentioned on the page together with links. I made web search and attempted to find their further products, but found nothing, what would be related to "Digital Music Software" company.

3) Where is the company web page? We know Audio Transcoder webpage, but Digital Music Software, developing expanding range of products, where it is??

 

The product Audio Transcoder really exists and different download portals mention few older versions too, so most probably it is really under active development. But the rest ... Four-flushing is nothing unexpected in Russia.

 

The section you quoted appears to have been stolen from this website:

 

https://www.movavi.com/about/

 

Quote

Digital Music Software an independent software developing variety of multimedia programs that help you have fun with your music on Windows. We develop easy-to-use and powerful software that inspires people to edit, enhance, and share their content. Our ever-expanding range of products is sold in more than 200 countries.

 

Quote

 

Movavi offers a wide variety of multimedia programs that help you have fun with your videos, music, and photos on any platform and any device. We develop easy-to-use and powerful software that inspires people to edit, enhance, and share their content.

 

Since its establishment in 2004, Movavi has grown from a startup run by a small group of enthusiasts to an international business with over 400 employees. Our ever-expanding range of products is sold in more than 200 countries.

 

 

[plissken]

On 11/5/2020 at 12:00 AM, cappo said:

So my question goes to all those addicted to best: what is your favorite FLAC-to-WAV converter?

 

I think you meant to ask what is your favorite WAV to FLAC compressor. There is no conversion going on.

 

You should be able to take a WAV, generate an MD5 hash, FLAC compress/decompress and get the same MD5 hash.

 

I shot a video and posted it here years ago bursting this particular myth.

[Miska]

14 minutes ago, plissken said:

I think you meant to ask what is your favorite WAV to FLAC compressor. There is no conversion going on.

 

You should be able to take a WAV, generate an MD5 hash, FLAC compress/decompress and get the same MD5 hash.

 

I shot a video and posted it here years ago bursting this particular myth.

 

FLAC of course comes with the original "flac" command line tool that converts between FLAC and WAV. That's the official one.

 

What I wanted and none of the existing tools nicely provided was possibility to take for example 352.8/24 DXD WAV and create for example 120/20 FLAC out of it. One of the many reasons to create my own tool.

 

[plissken]

On 11/7/2020 at 12:37 AM, fas42 said:

listening to FLAC means that the conversion mechanism that uncompresses the FLAC is active at the same time as listening

 

You are making blanket statements where you shouldn't be. You are spreading misinformation.

 

FLAC heavy lifting happens on the compression. The decompression time is basically the same regardless of the compression level used. It is asymmetric in this regard. JRiver will 100% uncompress and then play back.

 

Again I shot a video and posted it here years ago showing this to be the case.

[plissken]

On 11/7/2020 at 1:25 AM, sandyk said:

I agree that although the checksums may say that they are identical, that they can however sound different even though all of your different converters show the same result, as they should.

 However, the owner of the Forum and the qualified E.Es and S/W people will insist that you are imagining the differences if the checksums are the same. 

 

Not only that Alex but I've invited you to publicly demonstrate this magical ability you posses.

[fas42]

2 minutes ago, plissken said:

 

You are making blanket statements where you shouldn't be. You are spreading misinformation.

 

FLAC heavy lifting happens on the compression. The decompression time is basically the same regardless of the compression level used. It is asymmetric in this regard. JRiver will 100% uncompress and then play back.

 

Again I shot a video and posted it here years ago showing this to be the case.

 

In what sense? Decompression is an algorithm, that requires processing activity to occur - digital circuitry, and time, needs to be allocated to this. Whether "heavy lifting" is needed, and the clock time to do it, is not relevant to the fact that this activity must occur, to hear the playback - of course, the decompression could occur completely prior to playback - and the WAV data be in a buffer, to be read in real time. But how would this work with a whole CD's worth of music?

[plissken]

13 minutes ago, fas42 said:

n what sense? Decompression is an algorithm, that requires processing activity to occur - digital circuitry, and time, needs to be allocated to this. Whether "heavy lifting" is needed, and the clock time to do it, is not relevant to the fact that this activity must occur, to hear the playback - of course, the decompression could occur completely prior to playback - and the WAV data be in a buffer, to be read in real time. But how would this work with a whole CD's worth of music?

 

Component and software selection are always important considerations. Very few software devs have their heads screwed on right.

 

I use JRiver for a few reasons but many have to do with their design approach: 1. They actually take advantage of computers and the ability to have gobs of RAM so they will allow buffering of entire track and album.  2. They take advantage of what ever wire speed you can provide.  3. They take advantage of CPU available by allowing you to choose to decode into memory then playback.

 

Even copying a file 'requires processing activity'. In my video decodes were around 1 second regardless of compression on rather pedestrian x86 silicon.

 

CD's are played a track at a time. Also in another video I concatenated an entire CD in Audacity, compressed to .FLAC, and in Jriver over my 10GB connection clicked play and in the few seconds that it took me to reach in back and pull the fiber the album played back in it's entirety. This was on a $69 Celeron 3350 based ASRock mainboard with 8GB RAM, W10x64 Pro, and SSD, 10GB Solar Flare NIC.