Silly resistor values

[Archimedes' Lever]

It's a lossless compression system, you moron:

Lossless = uncompressed, idiot!

Compression = loss.

Only a completely brainless retard cannot see that logical outcome.

Even if it does get "encoded" no compression takes place.It IS a
lossless AUDIO FILE FORMAT. It is NOT, despite what the wiki says, a
"compression format". What it is is ONLY a codec for converting a raw CD
file or other source to FLAC. It uses NO compression.

So go be a retarded twit somewhere else.

And no, not all the dopes that start and maintain a wiki reference know
what the **** they are talking about. YOU certainly don't.

 

[Archimedes' Lever]

Archimedes' Lever wrote:


No.

<snip>

In audio? Most certainly.

Hell, even in a still photo, it does.

Compression doesn't, by its strictest definition, have "loss"
associated with it, as many schemas are only designed to remove blank
space or concatenate repetitive sequences of an ordinarily random set of
code, into a slightly (or greatly) smaller set of data, that can later be
used to reconstruct the exact original data set.

However, by the definition used in the audio codec realm, it gets a
definition that will ALWAYS result in some loss.

If it hasn't lost anything, it never got "compressed" as it relates to
audio.

In FLAC, it does NOT get compressed. It ONLY gets encoded. The amount
of compressible data that would result in ZERO losses is virtually nil in
any audio file, and trying to compress that small of an amount of actual
compressible data would result in a more distorted finished product.

So NO, Mr. Compresso-Dope-O. FLAC does NOT compress. It encodes and
stores!

That is why the WAV file extraction and the FLAC file encoding are very
nearly the same size.

 

[krw]

Lossless = uncompressed, idiot!

I see you're keeping up your perfect record, AlwaysWrong?

Compression = loss.

Wrong again, DimBulb. Think Stacker.

Only a completely brainless retard cannot see that logical outcome.

AlwaysWrong, is once again wrong.

Even if it does get "encoded" no compression takes place.It IS a
lossless AUDIO FILE FORMAT. It is NOT, despite what the wiki says, a
"compression format". What it is is ONLY a codec for converting a raw CD
file or other source to FLAC. It uses NO compression.

So go be a retarded twit somewhere else.

And no, not all the dopes that start and maintain a wiki reference know
what the **** they are talking about. YOU certainly don't.

They're certainly not always wrong, AlwaysWrong.

 

[Joerg]

In audio? Most certainly.

Hell, even in a still photo, it does.

Compression doesn't, by its strictest definition, have "loss"
associated with it, as many schemas are only designed to remove blank
space or concatenate repetitive sequences of an ordinarily random set of
code, into a slightly (or greatly) smaller set of data, that can later be
used to reconstruct the exact original data set.

.... and yet in your previous post you said, quote:

"Compression = loss""

However, by the definition used in the audio codec realm, it gets a
definition that will ALWAYS result in some loss.

If it hasn't lost anything, it never got "compressed" as it relates to
audio.

Not so. If you have a phase where it is whisper-quite for a second and
you only store the time frame info (length) and the information
"whisper-quiet" you have compressed but you have no loss.

 

[Archimedes' Lever]

Not so. If you have a phase where it is whisper-quite for a second and
you only store the time frame info (length) and the information
"whisper-quiet" you have compressed but you have no loss.

Read what I wrote, idiot. Concatenation was mentioned. It is not my
fault that your vocabulary is so lame that you should be in a different
business.

Concatenation is not compression as it relates to ANY discussion about
audio, and NO, a "whisper quiet" segment does NOT get concatenated that
way. It isn't like video compression where the still parts of the screen
frame do not get transmitted on subsequent frames.

Another reason would be because despite what your muffled brain,
muffled audio perception response is, you are too stupid to know that
even the quietest passage has info that MUST be included in the final
"compressed" datagram.

Audio is NOT handled anything like a friggin jpeg file or mpeg2 stream
is.

 

[Archimedes' Lever]

FLAC is lossless. Download the tools, round-trip a few
waveforms and wee for yourself. There are lossy
systems. FLAC is not one of them.

<snip>

THAT is what I said, you retarded twit! FLAC IS lossless.

It is ALSO COMPRESSIONLESS!

THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT.

 

[Bob Larter]

AGAIN, you fucking retards! The PRINT JOB is a bit map array. Every
pixel. Every case. Especially when and if zoomed.

Bullshit. It depends completely on the print driver. If you print to a
PostScript printer, the printer will see a combination of bitmaps,
fonts, & vectors.

 

[Bob Larter]

Lossless = uncompressed, idiot!
Incorrect.

Compression = loss.

Incorrect. Or are you claiming that PKZip/WinRAR/etc doesn't work?

 

[Bob Larter]

THAT is what I said, you retarded twit! FLAC IS lossless.

It is ALSO COMPRESSIONLESS!

No, it isn't:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLAC>
"Free Lossless Audio Codec (FLAC) is a file format for lossless audio
data compression. During compression, FLAC does not lose quality from
the audio stream, as lossy compression formats such as MP3, AAC, and
Vorbis do."

THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT.

The only point you have is on the top of your head.

 

[Archimedes' Lever]

Incorrect. Or are you claiming that PKZip/WinRAR/etc doesn't work?

Stop flip flopping.

Audio is different than a binary file is. The file MUST be the same
out as it was in. The audio construct does NOT have to be the same for
multiple encodings of the same source. Each file can be different, yet
the track will SOUND EXACTLY the same.

You could MP3 encode a CD track three times and would get three
different files.

You *MIGHT* begin to get a clue now, or you might need further hand
holding.

 

[krw]

Stop flip flopping.

Audio is different than a binary file is. The file MUST be the same
out as it was in.

You don't care about your computer files, DimBulb? Figures.

The audio construct does NOT have to be the same for
multiple encodings of the same source. Each file can be different, yet
the track will SOUND EXACTLY the same.

Which has nothing to do with compression.

You could MP3 encode a CD track three times and would get three
different files.

So what? THe fact that the files are different doesn't make one lossy
and another not. Two lossless encodings can be completely different.

You *MIGHT* begin to get a clue now, or you might need further hand
holding.

You should try it sometime, AlwaysWrong.

 

[Archimedes' Lever]

You don't care about your computer files, DimBulb? Figures.

Read it again, dumb ****. I stated that binary files *ARE* kept exact,
you illiterate twit.