Burning FLAC files back to CDR

[Hyfi]

Not being a big fan of MP3s and the likes, I've heard how FLAC is the way to go. I'm still trying to figure out if the file size is smaller, how can it be Lossless?

Either way, my question is how should I burn the FLAC files back to a CDR for best sound quality? I went to use NERO and it threw an error. I googled some info to find out there was a plugin download for NERO which I installed. The files burned to CDR without error after that.

So, I listen in the car and it sounds OK but nothing superb. I threw the disk in my main system when I got home and was quite disappointed. Firstly, I had to turn the volume knob up much further than any other disk duped or original. The overall sound quality just frankly sucked. I have a 20 year old cassette recording I made of the original album that sounds way better than what I just described.

So my questions are;
What should I use to burn FLAC files back to a CDR for best sound quality?
Should I not really expect it to have good quality?

As a note, the test files were ripped with EAC to FLAC and came with the EAC report from the rip. I'm not sure if that info is relevant to my questions.

Thanks anyone.

[Feanor]

Not being a big fan of MP3s and the likes, I've heard how FLAC is the way to go. I'm still trying to figure out if the file size is smaller, how can it be Lossless?

Either way, my question is how should I burn the FLAC files back to a CDR for best sound quality? I went to use NERO and it threw an error. I googled some info to find out there was a plugin download for NERO which I installed. The files burned to CDR without error after that.

So, I listen in the car and it sounds OK but nothing superb. I threw the disk in my main system when I got home and was quite disappointed. Firstly, I had to turn the volume knob up much further than any other disk duped or original. The overall sound quality just frankly sucked. I have a 20 year old cassette recording I made of the original album that sounds way better than what I just described.

So my questions are;
What should I use to burn FLAC files back to a CDR for best sound quality?
Should I not really expect it to have good quality?

As a note, the test files were ripped with EAC to FLAC and came with the EAC report from the rip. I'm not sure if that info is relevant to my questions.

Thanks anyone.

It's very interesting to hear about what you're doing. But in the end, yes, you ought to expect CD quality from FLAC files burned to an audio CDR and you can definitely get that one way or another.

Do you tell NERO to burn an audio as opposed to data CD? I'm not aware of any CD players that can play FLAC, so I assume NERO is actually converting the FLAC to Redbook CD format when you burn the CD. Am I right on these points?

FLAC is lossless with a file size about half that of WAV or Redbook CD files because file compression is used. This much like the ZIP format except optimized for really-time playback. FLAC players decompress the bits prior to passing to the DSP or DAC.

You might try a CD burning program other than NERO. I guess EAC doesn't burn, but perhaps your computer player burns CDs, try it. Otherwise get dBpoweramp (http://www.dbpoweramp.com/), a great free program, (actually set of progrms), that will rip, play, burn, and also convert files from one format to another.

[kexodusc]

I'd 2nd dBpoweramp...simple, but very good at what it does.

If you rip a file to FLAC and then put it on CD-R in the CD audio format, it will be a bit-for-bit identical copy of the CD original. FLAC just uses a more efficient coding scheme than CD...it doesn't discard any information. Like Feanor said, you can ZIP a word file, and when you unZIP it, your document is there, word for word the same as the original...

One theory as to why you may experience sound quality deficiencies though - a lot of programs like NERO have a bunch of features like gain normalization, EQ adjustments, etc, etc that are selected by default...sometimes those do a lot more harm than good, and even alter the original recording data. Haven't used NERO in years so I don't know if that's your problem, just speculating here. But you definitely wouldn't want that.

[noddin0ff]

There shouldn't be any volume loss in transferring back and forth. It just doesn't work that way, Unless you've specifically added some signal processing along the way in Nero (not to be confused with converting formats). CD -> FLAC > CDR should give you the same result at each end, with the exception of digital errors. EAC should not introduce many if any of these. Burning may occasionally. introduce errors.

Burning errors usually come from using poor quality CDR media. Don't buy the cheap stuff. They can also come from old or cheap burners that don't buffer well. Sometimes they just happen and all you can do is burn again. Most times, however, blame the CDR.

Errors in the CDR should sound like brief pops or bursts of irritating noise. Like nails on a chalkboard except real short. They should not sound like hiss, or attenuation, or anything else.

[Hyfi]

It's very interesting to hear about what you're doing. But in the end, yes, you ought to expect CD quality from FLAC files burned to an audio CDR and you can definitely get that one way or another.

Do you tell NERO to burn an audio as opposed to data CD? I'm not aware of any CD players that can play FLAC, so I assume NERO is actually converting the FLAC to Redbook CD format when you burn the CD. Am I right on these points?

FLAC is lossless with a file size about half that of WAV or Redbook CD files because file compression is used. This much like the ZIP format except optimized for really-time playback. FLAC players decompress the bits prior to passing to the DSP or DAC.

You might try a CD burning program other than NERO. I guess EAC doesn't burn, but perhaps your computer player burns CDs, try it. Otherwise get dBpoweramp (http://www.dbpoweramp.com/), a great free program, (actually set of progrms), that will rip, play, burn, and also convert files from one format to another.

I did choose Audio CD and saw checkboxes but left them unchecked. I will retry with dbpoweramp and see if results are different.

Thanks

[Hyfi]

There shouldn't be any volume loss in transferring back and forth. It just doesn't work that way, Unless you've specifically added some signal processing along the way in Nero (not to be confused with converting formats). CD -> FLAC > CDR should give you the same result at each end, with the exception of digital errors. EAC should not introduce many if any of these. Burning may occasionally. introduce errors.

Burning errors usually come from using poor quality CDR media. Don't buy the cheap stuff. They can also come from old or cheap burners that don't buffer well. Sometimes they just happen and all you can do is burn again. Most times, however, blame the CDR.

Errors in the CDR should sound like brief pops or bursts of irritating noise. Like nails on a chalkboard except real short. They should not sound like hiss, or attenuation, or anything else.

I use reasonably good blanks and got no burn errors. The original errors I spoke of were when attempting to drag the files into the Nero program Add Files box.

I am just not hearing the quality that I think I should. Just for reference the album is No Mystery by Return to Forever. I have been listening to it since 1975 in one form or another and have an idea what it should sound like when played on a decent system.

[Stone]

I'd 3rd dBpoweramp...simple, but very good at what it does.

.

I typically convert to .wavs, then the burning should be routine through Nero or whatever burning software you use.

[Hyfi]

Otherwise get dBpoweramp (http://www.dbpoweramp.com/), a great free program, (actually set of progrms), that will rip, play, burn, and also convert files from one format to another.

So when I click the link, it wants me to register and then Pay to download. Where is it free?

[3-LockBox]

I don't see the benefit of ripping something to FLAC unless you're going to upload it for consumption by others.

[Rich-n-Texas]

So when I click the link, it wants me to register and then Pay to download. Where is it free?
It looks to me like what you're able to download is a 21 day, fully functional trial version.

[Feanor]

So when I click the link, it wants me to register and then Pay to download. Where is it free?

Good things don't last, eh? Looks like they've changed their policy a bit. Yes, there is still a Free version but it looks like you download and install the 'Reference Trial' version which reverts to the Free version if you don't pay up.

As a matter of fact they did always charge you for the MP3 codec license which is now included with the $36 Reference version. However I believe the many of the Reference feature, including the Burner and Batch Conversion programs used to be free, but no longer as it seems.

Why not try it? If you like it, spring the $36 -- cheaper than Nero.

[Feanor]

I don't see the benefit of ripping something to FLAC unless you're going to upload it for consumption by others.

Plenty of people will argree with you, arguing that (a) with the low cost of harddisks the 50% space saving is immaterial, and/or (b) WAV sounds better.

As for the latter point, I've never heard a difference and I know that a perfectly recreated bit stream is getting to my DAC because it switches on the HDCD indicate when the original files were HDCD. However it will largely depend on how fast your computer is -- some old relics might have a problem with real-time decoding. Bear in mind, though, that handling stereo 16/44.1 is pretty trivial for today's CPUs -- and it's a lot more work to decode MP3s which $30 portables are able to do without breaking a sweat.

As for the former, well I'm glad at the present time save the disk space for now. That could change in the future; when that time comes I will be able recreate bit-perfect WAV files from the FLAC, (but why?).

[Swish]

So when I click the link, it wants me to register and then Pay to download. Where is it free?

...recommended by Slosh I think. I needed it because, like you, I was unable to burn FLAC with my Nero files. Media Monkey is relatively easy to use and free, so that solved my problem.

Swish

[Swish]

I don't see the benefit of ripping something to FLAC unless you're going to upload it for consumption by others.

...scenario I had. Someone used Media Fire to upload a cd in FLAC format which I was able to download to my PC. When I tried to burn the tracks in Nero, I got rejected, so Slosh recommended Media Monkey and it worked like a charm. I had never heard of FLAC before and have no reason to use it otherwise.

Swish

[Slosh]

CDA/WAV/AIFF is encoded at a constant bit rate but this really is only necessary on peaks. FLAC and all other lossless formats employ variable bit rate encoding and only encode what is necessary to preserve the data without using the full 1411 kb/s for quieter passages.

FWIW, EAC has built in burning software, though there is a bit of a learning curve.

NP:

[Slosh]

I don't see the benefit of ripping something to FLAC unless you're going to upload it for consumption by others.I use my PC as a music server. Plus WAV doesn't support meta tag data. Personally I use WMA Lossless (ripped with EAC) because it is supported by all of my software without plug ins, including Nero.

[BradH]

I typically convert to .wavs, then the burning should be routine through Nero or whatever burning software you use.

Exactly. I use the FLAC decoder and then burn the WAV files. Same w/ Shntool for SHN files or Monkey's Audio for APE files.

[Hyfi]

I don't see the benefit of ripping something to FLAC unless you're going to upload it for consumption by others.

The only reason I got into this was because I downloaded an album from a torrent and wanted it on CD. I heard all about the non loss of sound quality with FLAC but after burning it to CD I don't hear any quality at all. Althogh I have tons of music on hard drives, I prefer to listen to CDs on a real stereo and not my PC.

[Slosh]

The only reason I got into this was because I downloaded an album from a torrent and wanted it on CD. I heard all about the non loss of sound quality with FLAC but after burning it to CD I don't hear any quality at all. Althogh I have tons of music on hard drives, I prefer to listen to CDs on a real stereo and not my PC.Ah, so it was probably a transcode. IOW, a FLAC file created from an mp3 source and not a proper FLAC rip. Since you already made a CD-R you can verify if it was a transcode or not with this tiny free program called Tau Analyzer 1.2.

My PC just serves my music to my stereo via wi-fi. Exact same quality as CD (maybe better - no chance of jitter).

[BradH]

IOW, a FLAC file created from an mp3 source and not a proper FLAC rip.

That's one of the reasons I decode FLAC files seperately. Usually I can tell by listening if the source was an mp3 but if there's any doubt I can look at the frequency spectrum. If everything's okay I check the sector boundaries with Shntool and burn away.

HyFi, if you're hearing bad sound quality it's NOT a problem with FLAC.

[noddin0ff]

I use reasonably good blanks and got no burn errors. The original errors I spoke of were when attempting to drag the files into the Nero program Add Files box.

I am just not hearing the quality that I think I should. Just for reference the album is No Mystery by Return to Forever. I have been listening to it since 1975 in one form or another and have an idea what it should sound like when played on a decent system.

With all due respect, if you are properly converting to flac and back, any difference you are hearing are not due to the conversions and burning. Digital is digital. It doesn't seem to me like you are hearing digital degradation of signal. You're hearing something else. That's my strong opinion. Sounds like you're on the right track though.

[fleecaf]

I don't see the benefit of ripping something to FLAC unless you're going to upload it for consumption by others.

Comes in handy for archival purposes I suppose, especially if you have limited data storage space...

[Hyfi]

With all due respect, if you are properly converting to flac and back, any difference you are hearing are not due to the conversions and burning. Digital is digital. It doesn't seem to me like you are hearing digital degradation of signal. You're hearing something else. That's my strong opinion. Sounds like you're on the right track though.

I downloaded a copy of VLC media player for Windows which I have not had time to play with yet.

I didn't rip the FLAC files, I downloaded them from a torrent. Maybe the other person's disk was a BMG Club disc or something similar with inferior sound quality to start with.

[BradH]

Maybe the other person's disk was a BMG Club disc or something similar with inferior sound quality to start with.

I think that music club thing is a myth. A dedicated pressing doesn't mean there has to be a dedicated remaster. If you download something and it doesn't sound right the odds are overwhelming that it's been messed with in some way. And there are a million ways to mess with it. The most common is converting mp3's to FLAC. Also, some WAV's are ripped from CDR's, not the original disc. That means the files have been through a burning process and some burner software may have been set to automatically normalize the volume levels. With all the audio software out there it could've had the high end rolled off or something, who knows? If you haven't heard the original cd it may just be a lousy mastering job by the label.

[noddin0ff]

I downloaded a copy of VLC media player for Windows which I have not had time to play with yet.

I didn't rip the FLAC files, I downloaded them from a torrent. Maybe the other person's disk was a BMG Club disc or something similar with inferior sound quality to start with.

Yeah, what BradH said. I bet someone downloaded MP3 from some shared network, burned an audio CD from it, gave it to someone else, they ripped to flac (the digital equivalent of polishing a turd...or maybe just looking at a turd and 'calling' it polished.), the process was repeated through out the internet crossing many college campuses and international boundaries, until someone uploaded the flac as a torrent. Who knows. You can't trust the internet; at least, I can't.

cheers!

[nobody]

I've had good luck lately with Burrrn. It's a nice compact program and it does the conversions for you. It reads Cue files, although if the Cue file is written for wav files and you're doing FLAC conversions you need to either edit the Cue file or convert first.

[Mike Anderson]

I don't see the benefit of ripping something to FLAC unless you're going to upload it for consumption by others.

(1) Takes up half the space;
(2) You can tag FLAC files;
(3) No loss of quality.

The better question is why would you not rip to FLAC?

The only reason I can imagine is that you are married to a player that doesn't read FLAC files (e.g. iTunes).